TRACK COACH Summer 2015 I 212
The official technical USING A 400M CRITICAL ZONE TRAINING MODEL TO publication of IMPROVE WORK CAPACITY FOR THE 100M/200M USA Track & Field HIGH SCHOOL SPRINTER, part 2 . . . . . 6752 TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF SAM KENDRICKS . . . . . 6760 BUBKA VS . LAVILLENIE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS . . . . . 6763 USATF 2015 Coaching Education Schools (JULY - OCT) . . . . . 6766 OFFICIALS’S INSTRUCTION SHEET: HIGH JUMP . . . . . 6768 PLYOMETRIC CONDITIONING TRAINING FOR TRACK . . . . . 6769 track from the editor coach russ ebbets formerly track technique
212 I SUMMER 2015 JUMP, JUMP, JUMP
The official technical publication of USA Track & Field
E D FOX...... Publisher A long time ago, before the Internet, they used to call plyometric training RUSS EBBETS...... Editor jump training. Plyos have gone by several other names but most coaches TERESA TAM...... Production & Design of any age were introduced to plyometrics as jump training. FRED WILT...... Founding Editor The name made sense because it was a form of workout that was used with jumpers. That being said plyos were seen as a means to train the legs. The whole idea seemed to trickle over from the Soviets and Eastern PUBLICATION Europeans. They did the research, used the scientific method and we had Track Coach is published quarterly by Jesse Owens, Ralph Boston and Bob Beamon. We were good; they knew Track & Field News, why we were good. 2570 W. El Camino Real, #220, Mountain View, CA 94040 USA. The exception here was the triple jump. The triple jump allowed for a non- American diversity. Brazil, Poland, Russia, Sweden all had gold medal threats The Fall 2015 issue (No. 213) in the 25 years after World War II. We had some good guys but until Al Joyner, of Track Coach will be e-mailed Willie Banks, Mike Conley and Kenny Harrison came along all we had was to subscribers by October 1, 2015. good guys.
SUBSCRIPTIONS Plyos work because they capitalize on the activation of the body’s stretch reflex $20.00 per year, U.S. or foreign. or stretch-shortening cycle—exact terminology is still an issue today. The stretch Track Coach became a digital-only reflex is the elastic recoil in the body that essentially produces free energy, actually publication in 2015. a burst of energy that allows for a more explosive leap, bound, jump or throw. Oh yes, once they figured out that the stretch reflex can be activated in virtually BACK ISSUES OF any muscle or coordinated movement this understanding greatly enhanced body TRACK COACH movements and their technical execution in the throwing events. Think of the blocking of the free arm in the shot put or the stretch across the pecs before the Many back issues of Track Technique/ discus release as telling examples. Track Coach, #92-208, are available singly at $5.50 (U.S. delivery)/$9.50 (foreign delivery) each postpaid. No If you were to ask my Level 1 Coaching Ed colleagues where I stand on plyos most issues previous to #111 are available. would recall how I have lobbied long and loud on the ills of plyometrics. I’m sure the summary statement would be that I “hate” them or poo-poo their use. In defense that To order, send your check to isn’t quite right. I feel I do understand the training method, appreciate the intent of the method and I have and would still use plyometrics if I were coaching today. So what Track Coach is the problem? 2570 W El Camino Real, Suite 220, My issue is that in 2015 plyos are still a mis- or poorly understood training component. Mountain View, CA 94040 Somebody attends a high level clinic, sees something on YouTube or chances on
continued on NEXT PAGE
TRACK COACH — 6750 something written and 24 hours later a training component used to refine, as Publisher’s Note: In this issue, there’s every 7th grader on the team is bounding humanly possible, the neuromuscular a rarity—two articles by the same along with no regard to force, frequency response of the stretch reflex. If that author. But in this case, the author is or duration. is too technical read it as a means to our longtime pole vault analyst, David train a more explosive action or reaction. Bussabarger. The two pieces—one on Because I feel that plyos are not To that end I’ll stick to my guns and top American vaulter Sam Kendricks well understood they are frequently caution against the inappropriate use and the other comparing Lavillenie’s misapplied. Just because America’s of plyometrics. For the right person, at technique to Bubka’s are just so latest threat in the long or triple (male the right point in the season, plyos can immediately relevant that we did not or female) can execute a seemingly put a fine edge on the knife. Mistakenly want to postpone either of them. In any simple yet nonetheless remarkable used on the child or aging baby boomer case, let us take this space to thank series of jumps or med ball throws misses the point and will break the blade. David for his many insightful pole vault does not mean it is appropriate for In this issue is an excerpt from Jim articles and the excellent sequence the aging gym rat or developing child. Radcliffe and Robert Farentinos’ latest drawings he has contributed over the Remember the journey to Olympian book on plyometrics, High Powered past decade or so, all with the aim of status has been an eight, ten or 12- Plyometrics, where they give an furthering the art and science of his year journey. The internal structure of introduction to plyometrics and provide favorite event. the athlete’s bones have adapted to the some common sense drills to this stresses of hundreds of days of practice. training modality that will safely get Additionally the holding elements one started. of the joints, ligaments, tendons, fascial sheaths and musculo-tendinous junctions have also been strengthened by systematic and progressive overload Track & Field News’s through months and seasons of micro and macro cycles.
Equally important, but unfortunately often overlooked, is the necessity of balance, timing and coordination The Track Fan’s Companion necessary to safely execute a plyo The Big Gold Book is a basic item for every track drill. Speed and speed actions are fan’s tote bag. Take it to a meet and you’ll have a function of strength and having an athlete attempt certain drills without the instant access to a complete track & field metric maturity and physical strength courts conversion table, combined decathlon/heptathlon injury. The Olympian’s ability to perform scoring tables, the rules of the sport, implement plyometric drills is not simply the result and field specifications (weights, sizes, sectors, of something they saw on YouTube that throwing surfaces, etc.), pacing tables, barrier looked like fun. breakers (who was the first over 17 feet in the PV, for instance), and much, much more. An In truth the ability to perform plyometric exercises is the result of consistent effort essential resource for the coach, athlete, or fan. over the course of a career to prepare Updated 2011. the body/organism for this level of use, and if this is not done with a careful plan it is abuse. BIG GOLD BOOK is $24.00 from Track & Field News, 2570 W El Two points need to be continually Camino Real, Suite 220, Mountain View, CA 94040. Calif. residents add reiterated regarding plyometrics. First is the fact that less is often more. If 7½% sales tax ($1.80). Add $2.95 shipping/handling for US delivery, good enough is never enough you are $25 postage/handling for foreign delivery. Credit card orders welcome going to get hurt. The second reality by mail, phone (650/948-8188) or fax (650/948-9445). many ignore is that plyos are not a conditioning exercise. You do not use Or order online: www.trackandfieldnews.com plyos to get in better shape. Plyos are
TRACK COACH — 6751 PART 2
Using a 400m Critical Zone Training Model to Improve Work Capacity for the 100m/200m High School Sprinter
Adapted from Coach Gable’s Level 3 research paper. Part 1 ran in Issue #211.
By JASON GABLE, USATF LEVEL 3 CANDIDATE, USATF LEVEL 2 CERTIFIED: SPRINTS-HURDLES-RELAYS
PreCompetitive Speed Endurance, Special Endur- The weight program continues but Mesocycle 1 ance I, Long Speed Endurance) now after practice on the track is (November-December- simultaneously. done. The training structure, on a January) whole, progresses with two weeks of hard training, one week of recovery. In research and in past USATF The first week The week of Christmas into New clinics the following has been con- of the winter Year is typically scheduled as a sistently repeated by many: speed season is used as a recovery week. The winter season first—endurance later, as well as “test-week.” is planned backwards and forwards “acceleration is the start of the from this holiday season. speed continuum” (Mangiacotti). Both of these state that it is impera- As training enters into the month The first week of the winter season tive to begin creating proper speed of November, with the first Indoor is used as a “test-week.” Both new mechanics and train the glycolytic Meet coming the second Saturday and returning athletes are testing system early and often. However of December, the practice cycle of at several events: the 60m, 200m, for the high school athlete, who is four days on (Monday-Thursday), Standing Long Jump, Running Long maturing throughout the season, a one day rest (Friday), competition/ Jump, Scissor Jump over High well-constructed plan can properly aerobic recovery day (Saturday), Jump Crossbar, Backwards-Over- incorporate glycolytic speed devel- rest (Sunday) continues. But now Head Medicine Ball Throw. Based opment and speed endurance (i.e., the four days on are all track work. on these results the athletes are
TRACK COACH — 6752 grouped according to speed level Looking at the annual training cycle properly and safely build up the ath- and explosive/jumping ability. and what would be a comfortable lete’s work capacity to handle these highest-total-volume for high school types of workouts? In the writer’s For the first several weeks all train athletes, the workouts are struc- program the months of November the same, just at varying paces and tured accordingly. For example, and December are used to simul- intervals dependent on maturity and in the past the highest volume of taneously build tolerance for slower ability. Two days a week are dedi- 320m repeats completed in a single long speed endurance and alactic cated to specific technical develop- workout were 5-6 [workout totals = short speed endurance—each done ment in various events (block start, 1600m-1920m]. And for the repeat once a week. Mondays are typically hurdles, jumping events). All days 160m the maximum was two sets of LSE workouts and Wednesdays are include our dynamic stretch routine 5-6 x 160m repeats/3 minutes rest held for Alactic SSE workouts. and form-specific drill exercises as within set/15 minute rest between the warm-up, and varying types of sets [workout totals = approximately Workout examples, including per- aerobic exercises for cool-downs. 1600m-1920m]. For the maturing cent intensity levels, are provided high school athlete this is a very in Table 3. At week 2 preparation begins for the high volume to work at. These high- Critical Zone specific workouts come est levels are targeted to high-level These types of workouts go through January. Mentioned previously varsity athletes. Finally volume loads the months of November and De- the 400m race is viewed in three and intensities are lowered for JV cember and then are periodically segments: either as the 40-40-20 athletes based on their respective mixed in throughout the rest of the percentages or as 160m-160m-80m. age and ability level. winter/spring seasons in recovery It is the specific distances here that weeks or in place of CZ sessions to is the focus of CZ training. In McTaggart’s CZ examples he change the stimuli for the athletes. gives a 4-week example which Also when discussing the neuro- As outlined by Tom McTaggart, goes from 4x320m repeats at muscular effect of CZ training a CZ workouts occur on Mondays 82.5% effort (Monday)/10-12x160m constant repetition of 320m repeats and Wednesdays each week. On repeats at CZ pace + 1.5 seconds on Monday and 160m repeats on Mondays athletes complete repeat (Wednesday) to 3x320m at 90% Wednesdays can quickly become 320ms at a lower percent effort. max effort/2x6x160m repeats at stale (Magness). Therefore these On Wednesdays athletes then CZ pace + 1 second. Again this workouts help the body adapt complete high repetitions of 160m is only an example, therefore the when increasing intensity and vol- at a calculated CZ pace + 1-1.5 writer’s program has never built up ume levels, especially around the seconds. Both workouts have 3-5 the athlete according to this 4-week February-March months. minute rest periods between each time period. repetition (depending on volume Beginning the second week of Janu- and intensity level). So, what sort of program would ary is the start of the Critical Zone
Table 3
Distances Covered Workout Type Intensity Levels Examples (per interval)
Long Speed 300-600m Intensities are based on previous • 1x5x200m, 1x3x200m Endurance season’s PB and goal time for • 2x3x200m spring season. Percentages then • 1-2x500m (jog) into 300m at specified pace, start at 75% (in November) and 1-3x300m jog into 150m pace reach 92.5% (in early May). Athletes • Broken 330m at fast-hold-fast varying paces work at a percentage for two 1-2x600m, 4-6x200m all at equal paces weeks, rest one week, and then 30-80m increase 5-7.5% for the next two- • 3x3-5x60m (builds through season) week session. • 2-3x60-90-120 ladder • Mix 30 Flys and 60m at top speed
Disclaimer: Adjustments are always made within each session’s cycle of Hard-Hard-Recover based on the individual athlete, competition schedule, holidays, and, more important through the winter months—weather.
TRACK COACH — 6753 training phase. The two CZ phases 7.3-7.4 in the 60m. At the Indoor emphasis on the glycolytic aspect each last six weeks—winter phase State Championships (February for explosiveness out of the blocks ending the week before Indoor 22, 2014), the athlete was placed and in the jumps). States, spring phase ending the on the 400m leg of the Distance week of Outdoor States. At the onset Medley Relay. Having never raced the volume is low at 85% intensity, a 400m before the athlete ran a The CZ training is with long rest periods. Example: 51-mid to help the team place 8th a highly intensive Intensive Tempo 1 (1st CZ practice) at the Indoor State Championships. 8-week program = 4 x 320m at 85% effort (49s-50s While continuing the Critical Zone that is planned for a 50s 400 peak goal) with 4-5min training described here, in late-April from the Outdoor recovery between each—Monday. the same athlete was able to keep State Championships Wednesday—6-8x160m at same consistent pace for 3x300m in 42 backwards into CZ pace + 1.5-2 seconds, 3-minute seconds (at 90% intensity with the season. rest between each (or break into two 5-minute rest = competitive 400m sets depending on weather). Thus time of 50 seconds. begins the 6-week build. The following two weeks of March The first week of March is both the continue the focus on what was Winter-Spring week after the Indoor State Meet previously mentioned in the first Transition (February- and the first week of scheduled week as well as introducing the March) spring sports practices. Therefore athlete to Critical Zone training at this week is designed as an ac- the 300m-450m intervals. While the All workouts up to this point have tive rest-recovery week for those CZ training focuses specifically on been structured to build the work who competed at the Indoor State the 320m distance, one day a week capacity of both the short sprinter Championships, and an instructional is designated to 160m intervals at and long sprinter. Referring to the week for new athletes. For this week 87.5% to 92.5% intensity levels data contained in the final section practices are designed to return (McTaggart). of this report, athlete CK was an focus on proper dynamic stretch- 11.2 100m sprinter his junior year ing, functional movement exercises, For the LSE workouts the intervals (2012-2013). At the beginning of movement drills to teach/reinforce become “broken.” Broken intervals is his winter 2013-2014 senior year proper technique and form, and a loose term that takes a set interval competitive season he was racing re-introduction of SSE training (i.e.,
How to calculate 300m training paces for a 400m sprinter: -Goal Time for 400m = 50 seconds -50 seconds/90% intensity rate = 55.6 seconds for 400m (round to 56 to ease the math) -56 seconds/4 (4 x 100m segments) = 14 seconds per 100m -14 seconds per 100m x 3 = 42 seconds per 300m training pace
More precise calculations should be made for a competitive 400m sprinter. However for short-sprinters the rounded calculations are negligible since these workouts would be their over-distance (LSE) training session for the week. Finally based on this progression athlete CK was able to set a personal best at 11.10 for the 100m and 23.02 for the 200m in his senior year. Over his three years training under this program athlete CK was able to decrease his 100m time by 0.5 seconds and his 200m time by 1.98 seconds. Based on the athlete’s physical features (height 5’7”, 140 pounds), his predicted personal bests for each race were 11.0 hand and 23.0 hand respectively.
To see if athlete CK’s goal times for his senior year resemble his 400m split on the DMR, a ratio between the athlete’s junior year best 100m (11.43) and 200m (23.9) times can be calculated to determine a quotient value to predict his 400m time (Otte). Based on his junior personal best this quotient value is 2.09. On average athlete CK’s indoor 200m times were around 24.5 seconds. By multiplying the 24.5 and the quotient value of 2.09 his predicted 400m indoor time would be 51.205 seconds. In contrast athlete RJ (2013 junior year) ran a personal best of 22.5 for 200m and 11.15 for 100m. By dividing these times his quotient value 2.018. If one considers his junior year 400m best of 50.7 and divide by his 200m time of 22.5 to get a quotient value of 2.253. The average of each quotient value being 2.1355. This quotient can then be used as a predicting factor in determining what athlete RJ could achieve in the 400m later in the spring season. With an average 200m dual meet time of 23.2 seconds (23.2 x 2.1355), his predicted 400m time would be 49.5436 seconds. At the conclusion of his junior year athlete RJ ran a personal best split in the 4x400m relay of 49.2 seconds (4x400m relay time of 3:21.28). This is one way 100m and 200m season bests can be used to predict whether a short sprinter can handle an increased intensity load to become a long-sprinter the following year.
TRACK COACH — 6754 and breaks the sprint sections into between the acceleration phase and port, as well as in the data to be smaller segments. For example a maximum velocity phase) should discussed in the following section, broken 330m interval would look like only need minor adjustments. The the Critical Zone training sequence the following: 30m fly in, 120m sprint, CZ training now will focus on LSE has immense benefits not only for 50m deceleration, 100m sprint, 30m at the beginning of the week and the long-sprinters but also for the hold to finish. alactic SSE later in the week. short-sprinters. Throughout the an- nual cycle the repeat 300m/320m The distances may vary depending The CZ training is a highly intensive intervals help build the short-sprint- on weather conditions and previ- 8-week program that is planned ers’ work capacity to handle higher ous workouts, however the main from the Outdoor State Champion- intensity and volume training at their purpose of the broken intervals ships backwards into the season. maximum velocity caliber. are two-fold. First to see how the The following layout highlights CZ athlete’s mechanics and turn-over training over the last three weeks For example, in the 100m the ath- are affected by varying paces in a of the spring season: lete reaches his/her max velocity longer interval, and second to trick range from 30m to 60m. After 60m the neuromuscular system with Week 8 (State Championships) the athlete begins to decelerate, regards to fighting off fatigue state = 2x320 with full recovery on Mon, hence the athlete who decelerates (Magness). To follow this workout, 3-4x160 Wed, Travel Thurs, the least will win the race (Tellez). approximately 48 hours later when Compete Fri/Sat The purpose of incorporating the DOMS (delayed onset muscle short-sprinters into this CZ train- syndrome) has set in, athletes are Week 7 (District Championships) ing module is to extend their max then to begin the short CZ interval = 2-3x320 with full recovery on Mon, velocity stage beyond 60m up to phase of repeat 160s at 87.5-90% 4x160 Wed, Compete Fri/Sat approximately the 80m mark. If intensity. This will carry 2-3 weeks trained properly roughly 80% of the towards the end of March. Week 6 (League Championships) athlete’s race will be comprised of = 3-4x320 with full recovery on Mon, his acceleration and speed mainte- Competitive Mesocycle 4x160 Wed, Compete Fri/Sat nance phases (Tellez). & Taper (April-May) A full taper goes into effect beginning If we translate these percentages The months prior to now are integral halfway through week 6 (League to the 200m race, after the initial in preparing the athletes” bodies to Championships). Emphasis over movements of the start and dis- properly handle the intensity lev- these last three weeks is placed counting the deceleration phase at els of the Critical Zone workouts. on setting personal bests at the the end of the race, about 160m of From early November through late District Championship meet and the 200 are left to acceleration and March the high school athlete has the State Championship meet. speed maintenance phases. This gone through rigorous training in However in recent years to qualify 160m is the second workout of the explosiveness, alactic Short Speed for the State Championships many week during the Critical Zone plan Endurance, and range of anaerobic athletes and relays have had to set described previously (see Table 4). Long Speed Endurance training. At personal bests at the District meet this point in the training technique to move on. To focus training on this 160m for specific aspects of the short of the 200m race the previously sprints (i.e., block starts, transitions As evidenced throughout this re- described Long Sprint Endurance
Table 4
The race breakdown according to Mechanics of the Start and Race Strategy for the 100 and 200 by Tom Tellez 1% = Gun/Reaction Time 5% = Clearing the Blocks (no more than the 1st 5 meters, or 1st 3 steps) 64% = Acceleration Phase (up to 60m where max velocity is reached) 18% = Speed Maintenance (60m on to 90m of the 100) 12% = Deceleration (last 10m-15m of the race) Assuming 80m of the 100m race is comprised of the Acceleration and Speed Maintenance phases (=80%), then in the 200m this would equal the middle 160m portion of the race).
TRACK COACH — 6755 intervals (i.e., broken-300s, the CZ 80m (40%-40%-20%) the athlete who is able to double 320s, 95% effort 300s in the taper — 160m equals the 80% of the in the short-sprint events and the phase) complement the training of 200m race, 80m equals the 1600m relay squad, the Critical holding a strong sprint around the 80% of the 100m race Zone training described remains turn and into the home stretch. In — “Tricking” the CNS to main- unchanged. For the athlete who the 400m this 80% equates to the taining maximum velocity of will focus solely on the short-sprint middle 320m of the race. Several last 80m of the race events (i.e., the 100m, 200m, and/ authors have backed this up with or the 400m relay), in the last three their own research and training • Clyde Hart (Clyde Hart’s Train- weeks of training the 320m intervals principles: ing Program: 400 Meters) will be replaced with 160m intervals — Pure aerobic runs of on Mondays, and on Wednesdays • Vern Gambetta (How to Train 15-45minutes the 160m intervals will be replaced for the 400 Meters) — Power Speed intervals of with alactic intervals/Power Speed — Accelerate up to the 130m less than 10 seconds (= intervals (Hart) up to 60m-maximum mark, hold for 120m, “at- 30m Flys) velocity intervals. tack” last 150m — Strength Endurance (in — Train for both (Alactic) early season) of long hills Speed and Speed Endur- or stadium steps (= longer there are several ance than 10 seconds) training philosophies — “The athlete who can main- — Full Speed runs (alactic and principles that tain the highest percentage training) of 30-150m (i.e., can be adapted to of their maximum speed 160m of the Critical Zone suit the training through the finish ...” goal program) program for is to maintain 80% of the — “Pace per 100 meter train- a high school max velocity for the 400m ing chart” helps determine short-sprinter race. training targets throughout the season (Hart, 400 Meter • Jimson Lee (Fine Turning Your Training) Over the course of the spring months 400 Meter Workouts and Speed and the 8-week Critical Zone cycle, Endurance Magic Workouts) Therefore there are several training it is the volume and intensities — Train acceleration devel- philosophies and principles that that are adapted to suit the needs opment and max velocity can be adapted to suit the training of varying ability levels within the through entire macrocycle program for a high school short- high school program. At the col- — Ladder training for both sprinter. Due to the training age of legiate level, once the athlete’s Speed Endurance (<150m high school runners in comparison to physical body and neuromuscular intervals) and Special En- seasoned elite athletes, approach- capabilities have fully developed, durance (250m-350m inter- ing their sprint training from a 400m the Critical Zone program should vals) perspective helps the athlete and become more specialized towards — Use Speed Endurance inter- coach determine which sprint event the athlete and event. vals to overload the Central fits their ability level the best. Nervous System and train The attached data shows several for a high alactic demand; Benefits & Rewards examples of both “high-level” high use Special Endurance for for the Short Sprint school athletes as well as “above- relaxed sprint mechanics average” athletes and their pro- and “hold” phases When planning an athlete’s annual- gression in the training program. macrocycle training program, the Athletes CK and RJ have already • Wilbur and Norma Ross (Let training must have a purpose. In the been described. Athlete CZ would Computer Science … Race program described here the peak for be considered the “above-average” Training) the athlete is the last two weeks of athlete while athlete RJ would be — Break the race into three May—the District Championships classified the “high-level” athlete. segments of 160m-160m- and the State Championships. For From this study several outcomes
TRACK COACH — 6756 CZ Training to Improve Work Capacity of Short-Sprinters—Data: Growth Indicator = ([1st year of track season best—last year of track season best]/season best mark) x = % Improvement —Growth Indicator is calculated from the athletes’ 11th grade to 12th grade year. Reason for this is by the 11th grade most athletes have matured both physically and mentally, as well as having been involved in the program for at least 1-2 years. Growth Athlete Years 9th 10th 11th 12th Other College Indicator
RT 2005- No data 400—57.5 100—11.2 200—22.70 43-5 TJ (12th) 200 = 8.5% 2008 #1 Triple 200—24.8 400—50mid split 400 = 3.8% Jumper 400—52mid split 4x1: 43.04 4x1: 43.01 4x4: 3.20.36
ER 2005- DNR 100—11.41 100—11.04 DNR 21-6 LJ (11th) 100 = 3.2% 2008 200—23.45 200—22.98 200 = 2.0% 4x1: 42.31 4x1: 43.01 (10th—11th)
CD 2005- DNR 60—7.24 60—7.09 60—7.15 22-9.5 LJ (12th) 60—7.17 60 = 2.1% 2008 100—10.87 100—11.0 100—10.8 INJ (back) 11th 100—11.22 200 = 0.8% 200—22.45 200—INJ 200—22.7 & in college 200—22.26 (INJ 12th) 4x1: 42.31 4x1: 43.04 football 400—50.65 @ UPenn
VF 2005- No data 200—23.0 100—11.2 60—7.14 22-9.5 LJ (12th) Cornell for 100 = 1.2% 2008 400—51.37 200—22.9 100—11.07 Multi-District Decat #1 Long 400—50high split 4x1: 43.04 medalist over Jumper 4x1: 43.01 career 4x1: 42.31 4x4: 3.29.16
MP 2006- DNR 100: 11.20 400: 49.16 200: 22.4 2009 (12th) 200 = 2.2% 2009 200: 22.9 800: 2.00.25 400: 49.92 lead-off for 400 = 4.4% 400: 52.24 4x4: 3.20.36 (49.4split) PA & NFHS (1st 3 years, 800: 2:45 800: 1.55.48 National 12th trained 4x1: 43.01 (1.53 split) Record 4x8 at 800m) 4x4: 3.32.57 4x4: 3.24.40 7.33.48
TD 2007- 100: 11.40 60: 7.4 60: 7.21 100: 11.15 Hamstring 100—11.04 100 = 1.7% 2010 200: 23.7 100: 11.53 100: 11.34 200: 22.57 INJ—Spring 200—21.86 200 = 1.9% 200: 23.19 200: INJ 400: 51low split 11th 400—49.43 4x1: 43.04 4x1: 41.98 4x1 PA State Champ (12th)
JE 2009- DNR DNR 100: 11.44 60: 6.98 3rd 60m PA 100—10.82 100 = 5.1% 2010 200: 24.2 100: 10.86 Indoor States 200—21.76 200 = 8.7% 4x1: 43.68 200: 22.10 4x4 3rd Joined Spring 400: 48high split Outdoor 4x1: 41.98 States 4x4: 3.18.87 4x1 PA State Champ (12th)
RH 2009- Long Jump 110H: 15.0 110H: 15.5 110H: 14.70 LJ best 22- Cornell for 110H = 2.0% 2012 only Long Jump 300H: 38.47 300H:37.23 4.75 Decat 300H = 3.2% 400: 50high split 100: 10.96 400 = 2.8% 4x1: 43.66 (PA State Champ) 4x4: 3.34.99 200: 22.12 In/21.89 Out 400: 49mid split 4x1: 41.90 (4th PA State) 4x4: 3.23.68
TB 2009- DNR 100: 11.7 100: 11.7 60: 7.31 100 = 3.9% 2012 200: 23.9/24.4 200: 23.35 100: 11.24 200 = 3.2% 4x1: 43.66 200: 22.6 400: 52split 4x1: 41.90 (4th PA State)
TRACK COACH — 6757 CK 2011- DNR 100: 11.6 60: 7.42 60: 7.21 60 = 2.8% 2014 200: 25.0 100: 11.43 100: 11.1 100 = 4.3% 400: 58.3 200: 23.9 200: 23.02 200 = 3.7% 4x1: 42.85 4x1: 44.05
CB 2011- 100: 12.5 200: 24.5 200: 24.5 100: 11.1 400/800 at 100 = 11.2% 2014 200: 25.1 400: 55.22 400: 52high split 200: 23.30 Syracuse (over 4 yrs) 400: 57.1 4x4: 3.21.28 400: 50.8/49 split 200 = 4.9% 800: 2.00 split 400 = 3.8% 4x4: 3.20.10 (2nd PA District 1)
QH 2011- DNR 110H: 17.8 60H: 9.13 60H: 8.72 Hurdles at 60H = 4.5% 2014 300H: 42.61 110H: 15.5 110H: 14.83 RIT 110H = 4.3% 300H: 40.5 300H: 39.78 300H = 1.8% 100: 11.0 200: 22.64 400: 49high split 4x4: 3.20.10 (2nd PA District 1)
RJ 2011- Transfer 100: 11.3 60: 7.23 60: 7.19 2014 (12th): HJ at 60 = 0.6% 2014 10th year - 200: 23.2 100: 11.15 100: 11.06 1st PA District UConn 100 = 0.8% Spring 4x1: 42.85 200: 22.5 200: 22.4 1, 2nd PA 200 = 3.4% HJ: 6-2 400: 50.7/49 split 400: 48 split Outdoor 400 = 5.3% 4x1: 44.05 4x4: 3.20.10 States 4x4: 3.21.28 (2nd PA District 1) HJ: 6-6 HJ: 6-7
MS 2012- 100: 12.2 200: 24.8 200: 23.77 Currently in 12th Will focus on 200 = 4.2% 2015 200: 25.5 400: 53.30 400: 50.99/50low year the 400 and 400 = 4.3% 400: 56.9 split 800 his 12th 4x4: 3.20.10 year (2nd PA District 1)
NM 2013- 100: 11.8 100: 11.3 Currently in 11th xxxxx Will focus on 100 = 4.2% 2014 200: 25.1 200: 23.6 year 100-200-400, 200 = 5.9% Current LJ: 19-4 4x1: 44.05 LJ, Relays Junior LJ: 19-8
OH 2013- 100: 12.4 100: 11.7 Currently in 11th xxxxx Will train 100 = 5.6% 2014 200: 25.9 200: 24.5 year primarily for 200 = 5.4% Current 400: 54 split 400m Junior
NOTES: • Times with 1 place past the decimal = hand times from dual meets • Times with 2 places past the decimal = FAT (Fully Automatic Timing) from invitationals and championship meets • Grades 10-12 contained in building; 9th grade remains at the middle school but competes with 10-12 • No data found for 2004-2005 season (this was the first year of our high school and my first year of coaching)
Relay Progressions can be determined: handle an increase in workload, Year 4x100 4x400 and all programs are targeted for 2006 42.31 3.29.16 1. The “Growth Indicator” shows a an athlete’s peak performances th 2007 43.01 3.32.57 drop in times (improvement) for to occur during their 12 grade 2008 43.04 3.20.36 all athletes in their sprint events years. 2009 43.68 3.24.40 between their junior and senior 2. Athletes RT, CD, JE, RH, QH, years. The reason for using and RJ showed significant drops 2010 41.98 3.18.87 their 11th and 12th grade years in their short-sprint times over 2011 43.66 3.34.99 in the calculations was because their high school career in the 2012 41.90 3.23.68 the athletes were already ac- 100m and 200m. 2013 42.85 3.21.28 customed to the program, their 3. Cumulative drops in 100m and 2014 44.05 3.20.10 bodies had matured enough to 200m times in years 2006,
TRACK COACH — 6758 2010, 2012, and 2013 showed While he was able to drop his 100m typically one season, in the proper a significant drop in 400m relay time by 1.4seconds and his 200m effects of the Critical Zone training in time based on relay members’ time by 1.8seconds, the most dra- the short-sprint races. Nevertheless continuous training in this pro- matic improvement came in the drop a solid foundation of proper speed gram. of his 400m time by approximately mechanics, functional movement, 4. Years 2006, 2008, 2010, 2013, 6.3seconds (or 4.4seconds if you and aerobic training will not only and 2014 showed the dual ben- take his first year in the program aid in the adaptation to the stimuli efit of this program in training out of the equation). Towards the provided in the CZ program, but all sprint athletes towards the end of his senior year athlete CB also in the long-term effects of the 400m. This provided the team raced in a 3200m relay untrained program at all high school sprint with greater depth at all levels at the 800m distance. His split of distances. of sprinting, as well as a larger 2:00 lends evidence to the idea that pool of athletes to compete for while his max velocity at the short- References and choose from for the 1600m sprints has been achieved (11.1s Coyle, Daniel. The Talent Code. New York: Bantam, relay squad in the post-season. for 100m over several races), the 2009. 18-19, 32, 37, 78-81. Print. 5. Several athletes who have athlete shows a greater aptitude Crick, Tom. “Is speed the new route to endurance?” Track Coach, Summer 2013: 6521-6523. Web. competed and are competing at towards the long-sprint events at Duffield, R., Dawson, B., & Goodman, C. (2005). the collegiate level continued to the collegiate level. Energy system contribution to 400-metre and 800-metre track running. Journal of Sports show drops in their sprint times Sciences, 23(3), 299-307. due to a more developed physi- In conclusion the Critical Zone pro- Epstein, David. The Sports Gene: Inside the Sci- ence of Extraordinary Athletic Performance. cal body and higher volume/ gram detailed in this paper primarily 2013. Print. intensity loads at the collegiate focuses on improving the athlete’s Gambetta, Vern. “How to Train for the 400 Meters.” The Running Summit East: Speed Coaching level. ability at the 400m. The training Clinic 2014. Morristown Medical Center, Mor- times listed in the CZ article pro- ristown NJ. 18 Jan. 2014. Speech. Gastin, Paul B. Energy system interaction and A secondary benefit of this program vides the coach with a breakdown relative contribution during maximal exercise. Sports Medicine 31.10 (2001): 725-41. Web. is the ability for both a high school of targets for the three respective Grigg, Ron. “Four Goals of 400m Training.” Complete athlete and a post-high school zones—160m, 160m, 80m—cor- Track and Field. CTF, 8 Sept. 2014. Web. 13 Aug. 2014. -
TRACK COACH — 6759 A Technical analysis of sam kendricks
David Bussabarger examines the technique of young U.S. top vaulter Sam Kendricks, bringing to our attention Kendricks’s remarkable push-off.
By DAVID BUSSABARGER
New American vault star Sam verified push-off known to the writer top speed and then does a good Kendricks, last year’s NCAA and was 4’2½” by Joe Dial on his AR 19’ job of maintaining his speed U.S. champion and this year’s U.S. 6 !/2” in 1987. So Kendricks’s new and drive over the final strides indoor champion, is best known for record represents a major improve- of the run, which is critical to his modest hand grip of 15’5” and ment in performance. the effective execution of the his record setting push-off of 4’ takeoff. 5¾” on his PR 5.86/19’2¾” vault. Kendricks uses a 15’ 9”/207 lb UST- Note that this is the highest verified Essx carbon fiber pole. At 6’1”/170 The Plant push-off relative to the height of the he is about average size for an elite Kendricks lowers his pole to a bar (extra height above the bar of male vaulter. However 9.31 velocity horizontal position before begin- course does not count for record over the last 5m of his run and a ning his plant. This enhances purposes ). 22’1” long jump best put him in the his control of the execution of lower end of the spectrum for speed the plant. On his second to Kendricks’s outstanding push-off and springing power. last stride Kendricks curls his is of special interest to the writer. top hand up to the right side Referring back to Brian Sternberg’s Technical Analysis of his head while also lowering WR 16’8” vault in 1963, it has long the tip of the pole towards the seemed to the writer that fiberglass The Run box. At the beginning of the last vaulters have yet to fully exploit First Kendricks’s hand spread is stride he starts pressing the pole potential push-off distance (for about 21”, which provides good upward. Kendricks completes more details see Track Coach 169 control during the vault and his plant with his top arm fully and 192). Keep in mind that all helps prevent any twisting of the extended in a position directly first generation vaulters, including shoulders during his takeoff. He overhead just after his takeoff Sternberg, were just learning to begins his run holding his pole in foot touches down. Because bend the pole and therefore used a nearly vertical position, which the pole splits the center of his poles rated roughly equal weight in minimizes its effective weight. body at the completion of the stiffness. Prior to Kendricks, the best He accelerates fairly quickly to plant, he is able to minimize
TRACK COACH — 6760 any twisting of the shoulders Kendricks up for the effective the stored energy in the bent that may occur during the take execution of the subsequent pole pole. off. This promotes rotational swing. efficiency during the swing. The Extension and the Pull/Turn The Swing Kendricks does not appear to The Takeoff Kendricks’s lower arm continues delay at the end of the rock-back Kendricks’s takeoff point is to remain extended during his before beginning his vertical typically directly under his top swing. Due to his lead leg ac- extension. Therefore he can’t hand. He appears to begin his tion and positioning, his swing be considered a classic “tuck takeoff with a “pawing” action in is atypical. At the end of the and shoot” vaulter like Joe Dial, his takeoff foot as it strikes the takeoff Kendricks’s lead leg Jeff Hartwig, Renaud Lavillenie, runway. Almost simultaneously forms a second extended lever. and others. Kendricks also appears to push At the beginning of the swing his his extended lower arm up and elongated trail leg starts rapidly lift his folded lead leg while also sweeping about his left hip. At [Kendricks] not pressing his torso forward to the same time Kendricks begins only conserves maximize forward takeoff drive. driving his lead knee inward. the rotary torque This, in turn, reduces his radius of the swing by Careful analysis of Kendricks’s of rotation in a similar manner tucking, he adds takeoff indicates that he has to tucking during the rock-back to it by using his virtually no gathering action and increases his rotary torque head action as a during his takeoff. This, in turn, during the swing. counterweight to minimizes his springing action raise his hips as he leaves the ground. On The Rock-Back the positive side this results in Kendricks begins his rock-back a minimal loss of kinetic run by continuing to drive his lead Kendricks does an excellent job energy during the execution of knee inward and dropping his of staying close to the axis of his takeoff. Therefore Kendricks head back. At the same time the pole and timing the vertical is able to translate more energy he also begins retracting his movement of his hips and legs into the vault. On the negative trail leg. Kendricks continues with the recoil of the pole during side, takeoff spring reduces tucking and rotating about the his extension. He also keeps takeoff shock and promotes shoulders until he achieves his head and shoulders on the rotary movement in the pole’s a tight “balled” position which outside of the pole’s axis as he axis. Both these factors help the maximizes the shortening of his extends so that he is in the best vaulter maximize his hand grip. radius of rotation. In theory he possible balanced position for not only conserves the rotary the pole to lift him. Once airborne Kendricks kicks torque of the swing by tucking, his lead leg outward like a he adds to it by using his head Once Kendricks’s extension is hurdler. It doesn’t appear to the action as a counterweight to complete he begins his pull/turn writer that this action creates raise his hips. by twisting his right shoulder any special advantage during and hip to the right. At the same the takeoff, but it does impact After the completion of his tuck time he begins a “hook-like” the subsequent swing. Kendricks begins a piking action pulling action with the arms that lead by his right leg/foot. He harmonizes with the recoiling At the completion of his takeoff finishes his rock-back in a “split pole. Finally, Kendricks does Kendricks’s torso is pressed well legged” piked position with his an excellent job of continuing forward causing his top arm and right leg/foot bent back outside to sustain vertical flight during takeoff leg to be flexed well back. and past his top arm and with his pull/turn action. At the same time his legs form his hips well above his shoul- a pronounced opposing split ders. Kendricks is now in an The Push-Off and Clearance position. The overall result sets outstanding position to receive At this point the combination
TRACK COACH — 6761 of converted forward run mo- Illustrations by David Bussabarger mentum and the recoil of the pole work together to shoot Kendricks up and over his top hand. He does an excellent job of maintaining a concave arch in his body over the bar and then lifts his arms out of harm’s way at the last possible instant.
The writer can see several possible reasons for Kendricks’s superior push-off.
1. In the early decades of fiberglass vaulting results among elite vaulters strongly indicated that conservative handgrips promoted Brian Sternberg Over WR 16-8, 1963 better push-off distances and vice versa. It was commonly thought at the time that if the vaulter raised his grip up beyond a certain point, it had a negative impact on the vaulter’s ability to control the execution of his technique. However, over time adjustments in the execution of the takeoff made it possible for vaulters to grip extremely high and still achieve excellent push- off results. At the same time im- provements in push-off distance have been minimal since 1972 when Bob Seagren set a WR 5.60/18’ 4¼” gripping 15’1” (a push-off of 3’11¼”). It therefore Sam Kendricks (USA) PR 5.86, 2015 seems likely that Kendricks’s choice to keep his grip conserva- This means he has more rotary vault. The basic advantage that tive through out his career has momentum to convert into ver- Kendricks has is he does both contributed to the development tical momentum in the upper of these thing extremely well. of his outstanding push-off. stages of his vault. 2. Because of the lack of a gather- 4. Kendricks also does an excellent Increasing push-off distance, ing action and minimized takeoff job of exploiting the recoil of the like increasing vaulting height, spring, Kendricks loses minimal pole to catapult him upward. is as much a mental challenge kinetic energy during the execu- as it is a physical one. It is the tion of his takeoff. Most vaulters’ technique is either writer’s view that there is no 3. It appears to the writer that primarily designed to exploit reason to assume that both based on the use of special the catapultic action of the pole these factors can’t be improved techniques, Kendricks is able or to exploit the conversion of further. At 21 years old, it seems to attain superior rotary torque forward run momentum into likely that Kendricks has even during his swing and rock-back. vertical momentum during the greater push-offs in store.
TRACK COACH — 6762 BUBKA VS. LAVILLENIE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Our resident vault analyst compares the techniques of history’s top two pole vaulters
By david bussabarger
INTRODUCTION rotating the pole towards vertical movement of the point of grip in like a stiff pole. The problem with turn caused the underhanded path It has long been presumed that this idea is that it creates a higher, of movement of the vaulter’s cg to the primary reason vaulters can steeper path of movement in the also be largely fixed. In both cases grip higher on fiberglass poles is vaulter’s point of grip and his cg/ the arc of movement was very because the bending of the pole hips. Therefore it increases gravi- steep, which produced a great deal shortens the axis of the pole and tational resistance in the critical first of gravitational resistance in the therefore reduces the effective half of the vault. This is easily seen vault. This greatly limited how high handgrip of the vaulter during the by comparing Bubka with Lavillenie. the vaulter could grip on the pole. first half of the vault. Having done I contend that only an extremely Note that rigid vaulters deliberately a great many spatially accurate se- fast vaulter like Bubka, can achieve emphasized dropping the lead leg quence drawings of vaulters (done success by emphasizing rotating the downward or hanging immediately from film or photo sequences), pole towards vertical. after leaving the ground. This tem- I have developed an alternative porarily lowered the cg and caused explanation which I think is more THE COMPARISON it to initially rise less steeply, which relevant. That is, fiberglass poles helped conserve converted forward allow the vaulter’s point of hand From the writer’s point of view momentum. grip and his center of gravity (cg), the most striking and fundamental or hips, to follow a lower, less steep difference between the technique If we examine the path of movement path of movement during the first of Sergey Bubka and Renaud of Lavillenie’s point of grip and his half of the vault vs. stiff poles. Lavillenie is the contrasting paths hips (the hips are substituted for his This, in turn reduces gravitational of movement each vaulter takes cg for convenience sake) we see resistance against the movement through the vault. that in both cases they barely rise of the vaulter’s point of hand grip during the pole bending phases of and his cg/hips, which conserves In rigid pole vaulting of the past, the vault.This indicates that Laville- the vaulter’s forward momentum. the path of movement of the point nie has done an outstanding job of The Petrov/Bubka model believes of hand grip through the vault was conserving his forward momentum that the vaulter should emphasize fixed in an overhand arc. The fixed during the lower half of his vault
TRACK COACH — 6763 by minimizing the development of Illustrations by David Bussabarger gravitational resistance.
In contrast, when we examine the path of movement of Bubka’s point of grip and his hips we can see how steeply they both rise through the lower half of the vault in com- parison to Lavillenie. In other words, Bubka’s paths of movement waste a great deal more kinetic energy because they increase gravitational resistance.
A second important interrelated point is that Lavillenie also gener- ates much greater forward drive or penetration force during the takeoff proper vs. Bubka. This can be seen in Lavillenie’s lower takeoff angle and his “longer” takeoff action. Bubka, over WR 6.00m. Note that it requires four figures to depict Lavillinie’s takeoff action to Bubka’s three.
The combined upshot of these fac- tors is that Lavillenie, at 5’9” tall and with 11-second 100m speed, can grip as high (about 17’) as Bubka, who is 6’ tall and had 10.3 100m speed.
The upper half of Lavillenie’s vault is typified by what is commonly referred to as a “tuck and shoot” action. That is, first he employs a deep and tight tucking action. This has two effects: (1) At the completion of the rock-back it creates a body position like an inverted coiled spring Lavillenie, over 6.01m. that parallels the bent pole; (2) The tucking action conserves available rotary momentum by reducing the use the pole’s recoil to shoot him Note that Lavillenie typically takes vaulter’s radius of rotation. Secondly up and over the bar. Lavillenie’s off directly under his top hand. On there is an obvious delay in Lavil- catapultic action is also enhanced by the vault shown Lavillenie’s takeoff lenie’s movement at the completion the fact that he consistently achieves point is exceptionally far out. This of his rock-back before he begins very deep and pronounced bend in causes a distorted path of move- extending vertically. This allows the pole. In theory this allows him ment in the upper half of his vault. him to better coordinate his vertical to store more energy in the pole, In contrast to Lavillenie, Bubka extension with the recoil of the pole which is returned to him when the actively and continuously sweeps which in turn improves his ability to pole recoils. his extended takeoff leg through
TRACK COACH — 6764 the swing and rock-back until he forms a gathered piked postion at the completion of his rock-back. Immediately after the completion of Handgrip the rock-back he vigorously extends Hips his legs and hips upward, while at the same time dropping his head and shoulders backward. In effect, Bubka depends to a great degree, on explosive muscular action during the vault, to propel himself up and over the bar.
The differing technical approaches of the two vaulters produce nearly identical push-off distances of about 3’10”. Bubka Lavillenie
The evolutionary history of fiberglass vaulting technique can be described as a kind of strategic arms race, with each successive world record JIRO MOCHIZUKI holder developing a new twist to technique that trumps the last world record holder’s. In the case of Bubka however, it is the writer’s point of view that his technique did not represent an evolutionary step forward. Although his technique was very effective his success was highly dependent on his unmatched athletic talents (speed, explosive power and mental toughness). Lavil- lenie’s technique, on the other hand, certainly represents something new and innovative and so continues the dominant historical trend. One could say his technique is a “Bubka killer”.
Sergey Bubka and Renaud Lavillenie June 2014 in Paris.
TRACK COACH — 6765 2015 COACHING EDUCATION SCHOOLs JULY-OCTOBER
Level 1
10/17-18 TBA – New Orleans, LA 10/16-18 Benedictine University – Lisle, IL 10/10-11 William Jewel College – Kansas City, MO 8/21-23 TBA – Spokane, WA 8/8-9 El Paso Community College – El Paso, TX 8/7-9 Transylvania University – Lexington, KY 8/7-9 Innovation Academy – Tyngsboro, MA 8/1-2 St. Edward’s University – Austin, TX 7/25-26 Oral Roberts University – Tulsa, OK 7/24-26 Slippery Rock University – Slippery Rock, PA 7/20-21 Stillwater High School – Stillwater, MN 7/18-19 Cerritos College – Norwalk, CA 7/18-19 Jacksonville University – Jacksonville, FL 7/17-19 Johns Hopkins University – Baltimore, MD 7/17-19 University of South Alabama – Mobile, AL 7/17-19 Nassau Community College – Garden City, NY
Level 3
IAAF/USATF Endurance Academy 12/6-12 IMG Academy – Bradenton, FL
TRACK COACH — 6766 TRACK COACH — 6767 OFFICIAL’S INSTRUCTION SHEET HIGH JUMP
Adapted from “The Track Coach’s Digital File Cabinet 1.0,” a library of downloadable team management, training, and meet forms for today’s track coach, by Skip Stolley, Chicago Area T&F OrganizingCommittee.
HIGH JUMP: Head Judge
Note: Runway approach marks in the form of tape or chalk are permitted, but can be located no closer than 2 meters from the standards.
• Prior to the start of competition, do not permit any warm‑up jumps to be taken that are not supervised by you or the jumper’s coach. • Position yourself at the landing pit to closely observe the crossbar. • Announce the opening height of the crossbar and, regardless of the reading on the support standards, check it with a measuring tape extending vertically from the takeoff surface to the top edge of the middle of the bar to assure the correct height. (Most cross bars “sag” slightly in the middle.) • Announce the height of each subsequent raising of the bar during the competition and check it with a tape measure to be sure it is accurate. • Ensure jumpers do not break the plane underneath, or at either end, of the crossbar during an aborted jump. • Read the final results to competitors at the conclusion of competition. • Announce that no practice will be permitted after the competition. • Sign the competition form and send it to the timing service tent to be entered into the official results. HIGH JUMP: Asst Judge (Clerk)
• Announce the order of competition prior to each jump. (e.g., “Cindy Jones is up; Jenean Lowry is on deck; Sarah Hill is on hold.) • You may change the order of competition to accommodate those who ask to be excused to participate in other events and, in doing so, allow those competitors to take more than one trial in succession. (15 minutes should be the outside limit of their absence. Should the bar be raised during that time, it cannot be lowered for an attempt upon their return.) • Record each height contested on the competition form as measured by the head judge, as well as the clear‑ ances and misses of each competitor. • Time each competitor with a stopwatch if the rule requiring competitors to complete a trial within 60 seconds of their name being called is being enforced. • Keep the approach area clear of interference during competition. HIGH JUMP: Pit Crew Members
• Bar Setters (2): Standing on either side of the landing pit, return the crossbar to the bar supports when it is knocked down. Adjust the standards to accommodate each raising of the crossbar and assist the head judge after with measuring its height with a measuring tape.
TRACK COACH — 6768 PLYOMETRIC CONDITIONING TRAINING FOR TRACK
This is an excerpt adapted from the new second edition of High-Powered Plyometrics (Human Kinetics, 2015), written by University of Oregon strength and conditioning coach James Radcliffe and fitness professional Robert Farentinos.
By James Radcliffe & Robert farentinos
Any program dedicated to en- Prior to starting a progressive 12- and the skeletal system affect hancing performance needs an week program, participants must people’s tolerance of plyometric ongoing method of evaluating its have a proper foundation. This training. Youngsters who have not direction and participants’ fitness includes adequate strength, good yet reached puberty, for example, and accomplishments. To use the fundamental exercise techniques, should not participate in plyometrics, stretch–shortening cycle optimally, and an understanding of the risks especially at intense levels. The athletes and their coaches need of injury and how to recuperate continual growth of the skeletal to know whether athletes’ ages, from workouts. system, cartilage at the epiphyseal fitness levels, and understanding plates, joint surfaces, and apophy- of safe procedures are suitable for Trainers must know participants’ seal insertions make the extreme them to participate, whether they ages; genetics factors; and levels forces of some plyometric exercises are properly equipped (appropriate of experience, health, fitness, and inappropriate. attire and props), and whether good strength. Those planning their own exercise progressions are in place. programs should treat assessment The inability of young people at least as seriously because they to tolerate the high loads of the Assessing Ability are their own trainers! They should stretch–shortening cycle can cause look for any limitations that might confusion because they are exposed Is serious plyometric training a good inhibit progressive development in to forces during play and sports that option? Before getting too far in explosive power training. may equal or exceed the forces planning the specifics of a program, experienced in plyometric training the prudent approach is to look Age with a proper progressive system. honestly and carefully at factors Chronological age is an important The fact is that kids are vulnerable that could affect safe participation consideration. Bosco and Komi to excessively hard play, yet not as in such intense training. (1981) demonstrated that the ma- vulnerable as they are to consistent turity of both the nervous system repetitions of excessive overloads.
TRACK COACH — 6769 We contend that 12- to 14-year- at older ages. Continued use of training but also to determine limita- old participants can use plyomet- stretch–shortening cycle training tions. Flexibility is one, especially in ric training to prepare for future in proper progressions and using the ankle joints and calf muscles, to strength training. This has been moderate intensities can be effec- ensure proper foot mechanics and corroborated by researchers includ- tive for aging athletes, as evidenced proper hip set and segmental cush- ing Valik (1966) and McFarlane by the growing numbers of masters ioning. Evaluators should examine (1982). However, we suggest using athletes in explosive sporting events posture, noticing especially the moderate jump training with youths. (e.g., track and field, weightlifting). use of torso mechanics; pelvic tilt; Early progressions of low impact and As addressed in further chapters, and the positioning of the cervical, small dosages are best. Adolescents anyone’s capabilities can be evalu- thoracic, and lumbar spine. They do not appear to experience any ated and their training adjusted should check out balance, torso significant response to explosive based on maturity. tilt, and each appendage’s joint strength training until after the on- alignment, as well as the stability of set of puberty; therefore, training Physical Capabilities the foot in contact with the ground, programs should be prescribed and Health Limitations stance firmness, joint tension, and cautiously. Planned progressions coordinated control. are particularly appropriate so that Having a good level of overall fitness young people receive the many is helpful in all areas of exercise, Past injuries may limit a person’s other benefits (e.g., good mechan- and training for explosive power ability to perform plyometric exer- ics, coordination, structural integrity) is no different. A doctor’s physical cises. Joint stability and balance until maturity and mastery develop. exam is helpful. Before undertaking should be examined to note any past such training, people should have knee, ankle, or shoulder injuries. As As age increases, nervous system good body weight control and body mentioned in chapters 5 through 7, capability, muscle and joint pliability, composition, enough cardiorespira- progressive exercises are useful in and energy production decrease, tory fitness to exercise continuously rehabilitation from injuries. Limita- which makes plyometric training for several minutes or more, the tions on explosive training may arise less attractive for older athletes. On strength to handle their own body from back or spine problems. Exces- the other hand, evidence suggests weight in movements in all planes, sive trauma to these or any other that decreased explosiveness is and the mobility to handle move- areas that cause improper landing only partly due to the natural aging ment positions in several ranges capabilities need to be addressed process. Increases in endurance of motion. and planning adjusted. training, a lack of such training, and lifestyle also influence how much Several physical areas should be Table 4.1 lists the capabilities and explosive power a person maintains assessed not only when planning health conditions that indicate a
Table 4.1: Athletic Readiness
TRACK COACH — 6770 readiness or lack of readiness to The first 12 exercises at the top of the two days. However, in some participate in plyometric training. of Table 9.17 are called program cases, as in several of the third to basics because they are general eighth weeks, 14 to 18 exercises • • • conditioning exercises for any train- may be scheduled for the week. ing program, regardless of the sport. What we have found to work well One way to take advantage of ex- These basic exercises are a lead-in, is to split the exercises into two plosive training is to tailor exercises and they increase in complexity and groups, either basics and specif- to the sport played. Doing so not specificity as the weeks continue. ics, or, even better, to split them only motivates athletes because up to match the style of training they know that the exercises will for that day. Let’s say that on the help them in their sports, but also athletes should third week an athlete has the 11 gives direction to the individual spread the exercises program basics exercises as well workouts and progressions. You for each week over as 5 to 10 desirable exercises. On should not alter the plan to progress two days, preferably day 1, he or she does lifting and from general to specific, from simple with one or more sprinting as well as the exercises. to complex, from low to high and days of nonelastic– On day 2, he or she does just the shock intensity. reactive work sprinting and the exercises. In this between them case, the athlete should choose The plyometric workout program some program basics exercises that referenced here follows the stress fit either with the lifting (perhaps in continuum. The first section in each The first few weeks of each pro- complex style), such as pogo, squat table offers an all-encompassing, gram consist of program basics jump, box jump, split jump, or star basic continuum of exercises to use and, in most cases, only a few jump, or with the sprinting, such at the beginning of all plyometric sport-specific exercises. We call as prancing, galloping, skipping, training programs. Sport-specific these sport-specific exercises the or ankle flip. We could term this exercises, known as the sport’s desirables. Athletes should perform a vertical versus horizontal split in desirables, follow. These can ac- these exercises on the same days the week’s exercises. On the other company the program basics as as the program basics exercises. hand, we have found it useful to the athlete progresses through the Eventually, some exercises may split the exercises by complexity or continuum. Athletes can use any become technical training, or even intensity, with the first several basics program for the full 12 weeks or the warm-up, but during the 12-week and desirable exercises on the day any length of time. Athletes and program they are the training itself. that has lifting and running, and the coaches can tailor the time individu- Each coach or athlete may add oth- latter exercises of each section on ally or to fit the phasic constraints ers or replace some with others; they the day with only sprint training. of the periodized training cycle. know their sports and activities and For example, collegiate athletes can apply the principles discussed. SAMPLE DRILLS who are on the quarter system of For continuity, we provide 12 exer- Pogo the academic calendar rarely get cises for basic training and specific a full 12 weeks of training without sport work. Numbers represent the a break. Therefore, they must step number of sets and repetitions (e.g., Introduction back a week or two and continue 2 × 4-6 indicates two sets of four This is a beginning exercise for to progress with the continuum. The to six repetitions). learning jumps. The posture and exercise dosage in each column is the landing and takeoff positions for for spreading over two days within As mentioned, athletes should vertical hip projection begin with this the week. We call these continuum spread the exercises for each week simple lower-leg execution. cards for specific sports. over two days, preferably with one or more days of nonelastic–reac- Starting Position Table 9.17 on the next page pres- tive work between them. They can Adopt an upright stance with knees ents a comprehensive, progres- split the workload by doing half the slightly bent, chest out, and shoul- sive plyometric training program volume of every exercise on each ders back. for track and field.
TRACK COACH — 6771 Table 9.17: Continuum Training for Track (Sprint, Jump, Hurdle)
TRACK COACH — 6772 Single-Leg Hop ALTERNATE-Leg Hop
Figure a
Figure a Figure b Figure b
Figure c
Figure c Figure d
Action Sequence small cones or minihurdles. Begin by emphasizing a vertical takeoff, projecting the hips up- Starting Position ward for height and using only the Assume a relaxed standing position lower portion of the legs. Use the with the knees slightly bent and the arms and shoulders in an upward arms at the sides. Completely bal- blocking fashion. Emphasize slight ance on one leg while keeping the Figure d flexion and extension of the knee other leg in a flexed position with and more flexion of the ankle and the toes up, the knee in front of foot. Upon takeoff, the ankle must the body at hip level, and the heel lock the foot into a toes-up position up underneath the hamstring (see (dorsiflexion); maintain this locked Figure a). position throughout to ensure sturdy contacts and quick, elastic takeoffs. Action Sequence Using the countermoving effects Single-Leg Hop of the swing leg for lift and drive, and at full extension, tuck the Figure e Introduction toes, knees, and heels upward in The double-leg hop technique ap- a cycling motion to clear the cones plies to advancing into hopping in or minihurdles (see figures b-d). its most definitive form, with a single Maintain your posture and upright leg. Evaluation of optimal posture, position by blocking with the arms. balance, stability, and flexibility is Upon each landing, take off quickly even more important with one-leg upward again with the same cycling landings and takeoffs over a row of action of the legs. Execute the action
TRACK COACH — 6773 sequence as rapidly as possible. relaxed and at the sides. Variations locked in dorsiflexion and the heel Work for height and distance, but on a stationary start are walking up under the hips to reduce ground not at the expense of repetition rate. and running starts, which improve contact time and promote efficient performance efficiency. Other varia- hip projection on the subsequent Alternate-Leg Bound tions include alternating the landings takeoff. Either block with the arms in (e.g., right-right-left, left-left-right, a contralateral motion, as in normal Introduction right-right-left-left) to emphasize the running, or execute a double-arm This exercise is the prime exercise acceleration and reacceleration of swing. for developing explosive leg and hip the stride mechanics. power. Alternating the legs works the flexor and extensor muscles of the Action Sequence The updated second edition thighs and hips and enhances run- Begin by pushing off with the back of High-Powered Plyometrics ning, sprinting, and jumping actions. leg and driving the knee forward is now available in bookstores and upward to gain as much height everywhere, as well as online Starting Position and distance as possible before at www.HumanKinetics.com. An Assume a comfortable stance with landing (see Figures a-e). Repeat enhanced e-book version with one foot slightly ahead of the other the sequence (driving with the other audio/video is also available. to initiate a step; the arms should be leg) upon landing. Keep the ankle
Using a 400m Critical Zone Training Model to Improve Work Capacity for the 100m/200m High School Sprinter (Part 2) Continued from page 6759
Otte, Bret, and Dave Hunt. Looking at 100-200 ristown NJ. 20 Jan. 2013. Lecture. Vigil, Joe. “Training for the Middle Distance: 800- and 200-400 ratios: speed endurance vs. Sellers, Catherine. Sequencing your workouts. Track 1500 Meter Training Program.” The Running special endurance 1 vs. special endurance Coach Summer 208 (2014): 6645-46. Print. Summit East: The Premier Distance Coaching 2. Track Coach 145. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. Spencer, M. R., & Gastin, P. B. (2000). Energy system Clinic 2013. Morristown Medical Center, Mor-
TRACK COACH — 6774
COACHING UPDATES
USATF adds the USOC Safe Sport Online course to criteria for the Coaches Registry
The USOC Safe Sport Online Course has been implemented into the Coaches Registry criteria.All members of the Coaches Registry MUST have completed the FREE online 90 minute course by December 31, 2015, midnight to maintain their certified status in the Registry.
The USOC online course is located at www.safesport.org. Just click on Training, and select the FREE Safe Sport Training and follow the prompts. As you select your member organization, USA Track and Field, your membership number is your password.The course is now open to all member coaches. All questions concerning the safe sport program are addressed at [email protected].
DO NOT DELAY TO COMPLETE THE COURSE!
The PEP: The Best High Performance Symposium in 2015-SAVE the DATE!!
The PEP (Podium Education Project) will be conducted Saturday Afternoon, October 24, Sunday morning, Oc- tober 25.
Where: Tuscany Suites, 255 Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, Nevada, phone 800-491-9657
When: Saturday, October 24, 12:30pm-6pm (social to follow) Sunday, October 25, 9:00am-12:30 (continental breakfast)
Registration opens August 1, 2015; ask for the discounted USATF rate at the Tuscany Suites
Outstanding presentations including coaching panels with the 2016 Olympic staffs; the top USOC scientists reveal the special preparation to win medals in Rio; top Navy seal officer to explain their high performance training to handle stress; special presentation of long term athlete development to reach the podium; a top nutritionist explains how to enhance your diet to perform better.
DO NOT MISS THIS OUTSTANDING WEEKEND; network with the coaches who will win medals in Rio and discuss their coaching styles and philosophies.
IAAF Endurance Academy: IMG Academy, Bradenton, Florida, December 6-12, 2015
Back by request, The USATF/IAAF Endurance Academy Application is open: http://www.usatf.org/Resources- for---/Coaches/Coaching-Education/Calendar-of-Schools.aspx
Earn a USATF Level 3 certification in Endurance and the prestigious IAAF Endurance Elite Coach Level 5 diploma.
A faculty of international experts in the science of running join an outstanding group of USA master coaches including Dr. Joe Vigil, Dr. Randy Wilber, and Dr. Robert Chapman. Loren Seagrave will present on sprint de- velopment and strength for the distance runner. Class size is limited. Do not delay applying!!!
TRACK COACH — 6777 TRACK TECHNIQUE/ TRACK COACH CONTENTS
TRACK TECHNIQUE/TRACK COACH BACK ISSUES. The issues listed below are the only remaining issues of the printed issues. If an issue is not listed, it is out of print and unavailable. These issues are available singly for $5.50 apiece postage-paid for U.S. delivery; $8.00 apiece postage- paid for foreign delivery. Order 5-9 issues, pay $4.00 apiece; more than 10 issues, $3.00 each, postage-paid. Non-U.S. orders—add $2.00 shipping per copy. Some issues are in short supply, so order early. Visa/MC/Amex orders accepted by phone: 650/948-8188 9 am-5 pm PT, M-F. Note: The periodical’s name was changed from Track Technique to Track Coach with issue #131 (Spring 1995). Listed below are a few of the more prominent articles in each issue. There are many more useful contributions in each number.
A one-year DIGITAL subscription (four issues) is $20 U.S. and foreign. Effective with our Winter 2015 Issue #210, Track Coach will be available by electronic format only. Digital issues will be sent to the email address used for placing your order. Order from: Track & Field News, 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 220, Mountain View, CA 94040 USA. Email: [email protected].
No. 111, Spring, 1990 No. 155, Spring, 2001 No. 176, Summer, 2006 Biomech. Aspects of HT, Jesús Dapena Athletic Profile: The Emergence of Ryan Hall Carbohydrates and the Distance Runner, Strength Tng. for Female Athletes, W. Lopez High Jump: Tech. Aspects, S. Patrick Jason Karp Longitudinal Physiological Testing of Elite Muscle-Fiber Types and Training, J. Karp Selection and Design of Event-Specific Female Middle & LD Runners, Peter Snell Psych. Application for Distance Runners, Scott Exercises, Joil Bergeron & Robert Vaughn Christensen No. 178, Winter, 2007 No. 113, Fall, 1990 No. 157, Fall, 2001 Training Theory Roundtable, with Lundin, Distance Training Analysis with the Mac Launching into the Vaulting Action, David Ebbets, Lydum et al. Computer, Tony Sandoval Bussabarger Training Characteristics of U. S. Olympic Model Technique in the LJ, Günter Tidow Beginning PV Progressions, Jan Johnson Marathon Trials Qualifiers, Jason Karp Results from TAC Junior Elite Sprint Camp Active Landings in the Horiz. Jumps, LeBlanc Stride Length and the Human Organism, Scott Interview with Peter Coe Chirstensen No. 119, Spring, 1992 Load Variations of Elite Female Javelin No. 159, Spring, 2002 No. 179, Spring, 2007 Throwers in a Macrocycle, Jianrong Strength/ Conditioning Roundtable, Part 2 Technical Analysis of Yelena Isinbayeva, David Kinematic Analysis of Syedikh’s WR, R. Otto Foundational Concepts of Sprinting, C. Collier Bussabarger Physiological & Pedagogical Factors in Psychological Restoration, Ralph Vernacchia No. 139, Spring, 1997 Endurance Tng. Planning, A. Nurmekivi Film Measurement of Takeoff Forces in the LJ, Climatic Heat Stress and Athletic Performance, R. Mackenzie David Martin No. 162, Winter, 2003 Max. Velocity Sprint Mechanics, Michael Phase Distances, Percentages, in Men’s TJ at Colin Jackson’s Hurdle Technique, Milan Coh Young 1996 Olympic Trials, James Hay Troubleshooting the PV, M. Thompson Release velocity/Angle in Hammer Throw, I. No. 180, Summer, 2007 No. 148, Summer 1999 Hunter & G. Killgore An In-Depth Look at VO2max, Jason Karp Teaching the Women’s Hammer, Larry Judge Biomechanics of the Glide SP, Michael Young Psychological Adaptation to Heat Stress, No. 163, Spring, 2003 Are Tactics Important for Middle and Long Dist. Vernacchia & Veit-Hartley HS Team Dynamics Roundtable Athletes? David Lowes Angular Momentum of Hurdle Clearance, Craig No. 152, Summer 2000 McDonald No. 181, Fall, 2007 Strength Training for Endurance Runners, Sprint Start Positioning, Karen Helmick Biodynamic Analysis of the Rotational Shot Scott Christensen Put Tecnique, Milan Coh, Matej Supej, and Accuracy in the Horizontal Jumps Approach, No. 170, Winter, 2005 Stanko Stuhec Rubin Is Periodization Dead or Just Sick?, John An In-Depth Look at Lactate Threshold, Karp Sprint Observations, Kirk Reynolds Cissik Preseason Training for the Hammer and Strength Training for the Hammer, Todd Taylor Weight Throw, Glenn McAtee No. 153, Fall, 2000 An Appraisal of Shot Putting, Wilf Paish A Visit with Jack Reed No. 182, Winter 2008 Judging of Race Walking, Ron Laird No. 175, Spring, 2006 In-depth Look at Running Economy, J. Karp Mid-Marks for Runway Precision, Brian Risk Interview with Joe Vigil Patterns of Support in a Bending Leg, R. Adam Nelson Interview Lungs and Distance Running, Jason Karp Mackenzie Correct Race Walk Technique, Ron Laird Last 3-5 Strides in LJ Approach, Mike Jones No. 154, Winter, 2001 Training of American Decathletes, Huffins & The Glide—The Glen Mills Way Periodization Training, Jason Karp Hart Management of Risk in PV, Jan Johnson USATF Level I Coaching Education Program, Carolyn Ross & Troy Engle
TRACK COACH — 6778 No. 183, Spring 2008 Kinematic, Dynamic And EMG Factors Of A No. 202, Winter 2013 Patterns of Force in the Depth Jump, Spint Start, Milan Coh & Mitja Bracic Racing Strategies, Jason Karp Mackenzie & Grey Conditioning Spring Acceleration: Recent Modern PV Training Area, Kernan & Williams Q&A with Trinidad Coach Ian Hypolite Researh, John Shepherd Long Jump Technique, John Shepherd Arousal Regulation Techniques, K. Zackowitz Spirit of the PV—10 Tips, Tim St. Lawrence No. 194, Winter 2011 The Form of Wladyslaw Kozakiewicz, No. 185, Fall 2008 Top-Speed Practice Drills for Sprinters, Headly, Bussabarger Kenyan Domination in Long Dist. Running, et al. Harry Marra Interview Lantz Teaching the Hammer Throw: How to Get a Achilles Tendinitis Prevention & Treatment Beginner to Throw in Just Days No. 203, Spring 2013 Interview with Vern Gambetta, Russ Ebbets The 4x100 Relay, Clayton Davis Run Hard, Be Strong, Think Big (Fayetteville- Libor Charfreitag Profile, Glenn Thompson Children and Sport, Russ Ebbets Manlius Story) Transfering Strength Training to the Track No. 186, Winter 2009 No. 195, Spring 2011 Using Olympic Lifts to Strengthen Prep Heptathlon Roundtable Should Coaches Alter Running Form in Throwers Idealized Mathematical Model of a Runner Distance Runners?, Kirk Reynolds Steady Pace Running 400m, James Parker Built from Angle of Lean What Type of “Athletic DNA” Do Elite Decathletes Possess?, Bar-Lev No. 204 , Summer 2013 No. 187, Spring 2009 Coaching Kids Successfully: 100 Years of Motor Inspiring Young Women Throwers Developing Speed Strength for Collegiate Development Research, Matthew Buns Life After Throwing, E. Wanless Thrower, Larry Judge A Fresh Look at Plyometrics, John Cissik Tech. Analysis of R. Lavillenie, Bussabarger Assessing Sprint Ability, Jason Karp Fundamental Mechanical Principles in PV, Comparative Analysis of the PV Takeoff Interview with Harold Connolly David Bussabarger Is Speed the New Route to Endurance? Tom Tellez Interview No. 188, Summer 2009 No. 205 , Fall 2013 Altitude and Beyond: Hyperbaric Tng. No. 196, Summer 2011 Dynamic Stability, Russ Ebberts Eighty Years of Systems Coaching, Horwill Raising American Distance Runners to Gold Medal Shoes Or Barefoot: Which Is The Best Way Seven Steps to Teach the Hammer Throw Levels, Jim Hunt To Run?, Kevin A. Kirby Leadership Roundtable Quality Strength for Human Athletic Performance, “Choking” Under Pressure And How To C. Staley Prevent It, Robert B. Welch No. 189, Fall 2009 Collegiate Hammer Facilities: Compliant with Intl. Training Forwards Or Backwards?, Larry Teaching Distance Racing Strategy, Chapman Standards?, Larry Judge, et al. Hannon Skills and Drills, Russ Ebbets The Track Coach’s Digital File Cabinet, Profile of Kara Patterson, Kurt Dukel No. 197, Fall 2011 Continued, Skip Stolley Sport Psychology Roundtable No. 190, Winter 2010 Teaching the Hammer Throw: Perfecting Technique, No. 206 , Winter 2014 Looking Back at the U.S. 4x1 Disasters in G. Martin Bingisser & Ryan E Jensen Strength Training For Distance Runners, Matthew Berlin, Dennis Grady The Neural Gains From Strength Training, John Buns Athletic Power Development: A Critical M .Cissik Looking Back At U.S. Sprint Relay Results, Dennis Component for Throwers, Todd Linder Grady Interview with Tony Naclerio, Russ Ebbets No. 198, Winter 2012 How Plyometrics Works, Donald Chu & Gregory Recovery Principles, Clive James Coaching Strategies For Barrier Heights During Myer Plyometrics, Robert Marchetti No. 191, Spring 2010 Mixing The Right Ingredients, David Lowes VOQ Training For Cross Country & Track, Dan The Right Leg in the Javelin Throw, Kevin Where Have All The Gliders Gone?, Don Babbitt Kaplan McGill The Secret Of Sisu And The Making Of Lasse No. 207, Spring 2014 Ten Principles of Coaching the Comback Viren, Rolf Haikkola H.S. Training Timeline, W. Rowan Runner, Ashley B Benjamin Developing Proficient PV Technique, D. Bussabarger Athletics Outstanding Performer—The Vaulting No. 199, Spring 2012 Being a Meet Director, Bruce Colman Pole, Dave Nielsen Interview w/Kevin Tyler Safety Guide for T&F, Robert Rush Takeoff Point in Fiberglass PV, Bussabarger No. 192, Summer 2010 Coaching for Speed, James Ulrich Interview w/Tony Wells Top Seven Lessons For Coaching Runners, Dr. The Vegetarian Diet, Mathew Buns Jason R. Karp No. 208, Summer 2014 New Faces on the Team: Unfit T&F Neophytes The Transfer Of Momentum In Fiberglass Pole No. 200, Summer 2012 Increasing Self-Efficacy Racing at Altitude Vaulting, David R. Bussabarger Down Memory Lane with TC/TT Editors Rotational Javelin Throwing—Fundamentals Post-Performance Stretching For The Athlete, Fiberglass PV Trends, D. Bussabarger Official Timing at Long Distance Events Allistair McCaw Rainer Martens Interview Twitch-ful Thinking, Stephen Sniderman Sequencing Your Workouts Pushing The Athlete In The Weight Room: How No. 201, Fall 2012 No. 209, Fall 2014 Much Is Too Much? John M. Cissik Managing Teams with a Big Tent Philosophy If You Are Not Assessing, You Are Guessing Barefoot Madness Understanding Running and Aging, Utzschneider No. 193, Fall 2010 Hamstring Injuries and the Sprinter, Cissik Maximizing 800 Training, Sinnott & Rizzo 4x100 Roundtable The Invisible Injury, S. Weinheimer Shot Put Predictors, Judge & Bellar Strength Training And Distance Running: A Rotational Throwing, G. Thompson Scientific Perspective, Jason R. Karp Fitness Gains For Javelin, R. Bradstock
5/27/15 TRACK COACH — 6779 serving the track & field community since 1948
TRACK & FIELD NEWS With subscribers in more than 60 countries, T&FN is the standard of accuracy and completeness for reporting of U.S. and worldwide track and field athletics. Publishe monthly. Call 1-800-GET- TRAK (1-800-438-8725) to subscribe. T&FN now offers 3 subscription options—Digital, Print, and Print + Digital.Subscribers get free eTrack (quick results by e-mail).
TRACK COACH The official technical quarterly of USA Track & Field, Track Coach (formerly Track Technique) has been the sport’s major technical publication since 1960. Becomes a digital-only publication in 2015.
TOURS Popular sports tours since 1952. Write for information about tours to the Olympics, Olympic Trials, World Championships, etc.
TRACK & FIELD NEWS 2570 W. El Camino Real • Suite 220 Mountain View, CA 94022 • USA (650) 948-8188 • Fax (650) 948-9445 www.trackandfieldnews.com http://www.trackanddfielednews.com e-mail: [email protected]