10 % Rule of Speed Training

If you’ve read speed training articles, or watched most presenters and dvds, and even if you’ve gone through coaching education you’ve heard it.

10%

That’s the most you want to load according to conventional wisdom, 10% of bodyweight. Of course that’s a bit arbitrary because are we talking a sled or parachute. Grass or track or turf? So it’s evolved a bit to be no more than 10% decrement in speed.

Only 10%

It’s been handed down over the last few decades like a prized heirloom from mentor to apprentice, coach to athlete.

10%. No more or else! If you use more, you risk detriment to sprint technique.

Almost all coaches will agree without thinking twice. This is blanket rule for sleds or other resistance training and it’s applied broadly to both acceleration and maximum velocity.

Why?

I stuck to this 10% rule in my early sprint training days because it’s what other track coaches taught me and made some sense. However, over time, I couldn’t find the full logic and my background as a weightlifting coach probably made me biased toward more load. As I did graduate work in biomechanics I developed a new lens to analyze it. For many years now, I have used heavy resistance (50% to > 100% Bodyweight) to improve acceleration in team sport athletes.

One way to add weight for Mark Sanchez?

If you ask most proponents of the 10% limit why, you won’t get many solid answers, because people aren’t asking the right questions. Let me help ask some.

Are you training acceleration or maximum velocity?
Big difference. The kinetics and kinematics are not the same in acceleration and max velocity.

Quick Review: Kinetics is about motion and causes (torque, force, impulse, rate of force development, etc…) and kinematics (velocity, acceleration, joint angles, alignment, etc…) describes the motion. From a technique standpoint, it’s chicken and egg. Each impacts the other.
In terms of force production what we know today is that the HORIZONTAL component is large in pure acceleration, but the VERTICAL component is dominant in maximum velocity. A heavy sled provides horizontal resistance. Makes sense why a heavy sled wouldn’t translate to max velocity sprinting.
It can be argued that in most team sport settings, it is acceleration that is more common and therefore more important. Right now what I’m talking about is focusing on improving acceleration. Since we are talking about acceleration, and most of the research on resisted sprinting is on max velocity, THROW IT OUT.
So what, if it acutely changes some kinematics?
Sprinting with resistance changes the kinetics and kinematics. So what? Is that inherently bad? Isn’t that often a goal of training drills?

In coaching athletes I am often trying to change kinematics. That can be the main point. I may be trying to develop a greater arm action, or a larger horizontal force component, or a higher stride frequency. It’s not whether or not heavy sleds changes things. For the coach it’s a question of; is it the change you want?

Speaking of different kinematics, what about some other drills that we use? Wall drills change the upper body kinematics, but we decide that the value of training the core and lower body motion is worth the temporary change in the upper body. Plyometrics have different kinematics as do many “technical” drills. Why are those OK but, heavy resisted sprinting is not?

Remember also, of the little data there is on acceleration, this is an acute change while doing the resisted run. The question is what does it do to the actual acceleration mechanics without resistance?

What are you using it for?
This is a key question that should drive our decision to use any drills. I like to classify drills as technical, training, or applied. This helps guide our selection based on athlete and training session goals.

Technical drills are designed to improve motor control, build kinesthetic awareness and teach the athlete how to move. Training drills are designed to elicit a training effect such as force characteristics, or energy system development. Applied drills are intended to add variability and let the athlete discover the movement solutions to different problems.

In a movement training session we will have some of each, but with a focus on one area more than others. I think resisted sprint drills can be used in different ways.

An athlete may get a technical benefit out of heavy sled resistance if it brings about kinesthetic awareness, helps them understand the feel of driving back. In working on 40 yd dash starts, I’ll use that heavy sled to build awareness of what it feels like to have tension in the start position.

It also can be a training drill. We can use it to build special strength and work on the impulse components. When used in a contrast method (which for me is almost always) it has a potentiating effect on the following un-resisted accelerations.

What research says it’s detrimental?
There is research, almost all of it on maximum velocity sprinting, which shows changes in kinematics with heavier resistances. Does that mean it causes negative adaptation?

I don’t care if the athlete’s time over a distance is 1000% longer if the technique is right. Lets imagine I have a very heavy load on the sled. The athlete goes for 6-10 steps. If it only moves a few inches on each stride, so what? As long as the mechanics are right and the contact time is good, why not? You are getting a stimulus even if it didn’t move.

Not exactly what I had in mind.

I definitely think you can cause detriment to acceleration technique if you use it poorly. Add a lot of resistance to the athlete and their form could fall apart. Allowing this while yelling “Drive harder!” isn’t what I consider good coaching.

Tips to best use heavy sleds for acceleration
Enough questions already. Bottom line, I question the proposed rationale for limiting sleds resistance to 10% when training pure acceleration. You might want to question it too. Here are some tips I use for sled resisted acceleration.

Use heavy sleds for pure acceleration.
After using these techniques and analyzing video I advocate using loads greater than 50% and sometimes up to 100% for the first 5 steps of acceleration and that’s it. If you are getting into longer distances I think you need lower resistance. As a matter of fact, we barely ever use any horizontal resistance during max velocity. I might be more inclined to add a weight vest to influence the vertical component.

Make sure you get the effect you are looking for.
Heavy sleds are going to change something. Whether its kinetics or kinematics, consider how the change will influence the adaptation you like. If I have a very strong athlete, who is a plodder with long ground contact times already, I need to be wary of very heavy sleds because the change may not be what I was looking for.

Contrast with free accelerations
Always follow heavy resisted acceleration with free acceleration. If you are using it as a technical exercise than this clearly makes sense. If you are using it for a training effect, it may not be as clear cut, but I still follow with free accelerations.

I advocate a “guided learning” approach to movement training. I introduce technical and training effect elements, then allow the athlete to solve movement problems. These applied drills are key for the individual to adapt the technique to their personal and environmental constraints. I think it’s a key to get a transfer effect into actual sport competition and preventing that robotic look to movement.

Use waves for more reps.
With an athlete that can handle a higher training load and will benefit from more reps, use contrast waves. Just increasing volume, you could add more reps in each set of resisted runs and then go to more reps of un-resisted accelerations.

Instead I would suggest doing multiple waves. Each wave would include 2-5 reps with resistance and then doing at least as many un-resisted. These contrast sets can then be repeated by going back to resistance and finishing with un-resisted. I find this helps with the motor control adaptation better and prefer a series of waves where each wave has fewer resisted reps.
Go Use It
So now it’s time to figure out what you are going to use. Ask the questions, analyze the acute effect. Review training adaptations and decide what works. That’s what coaches do!

Training Prescription: Placebo

A post on Precision Nutrition got me thinking about a key aspect in the Art of Coaching; the Placebo effect.  As a performance coach you will have to understand this and manage it, and potentially employee it.

During this year's NFL Draft preparation, we had athletes that struggle with the over-reaching phase.  Now understand, most collegiate football players have not gone through an extended over-reaching period that affects them neuromuscularly.  This may sound like a knock on strength programs, but its not.  In a football offseason, they are making steady progression and the emphasis is strength, power and mass in most cases.

Under the stress of the NFL draft process and preparing for the Combine and Pro Days, these athletes struggle with the feeling of over-reaching. We often look to effectively use some methods that may be as much "placebos" as anything else. 

Here's one we see every February. We have the case of an athlete preparing for the NFL Combine. His focus is the 40 and nothing but. Training is going great. Times in the 10 and 20-40 are dropping. He's been training hard and technique is better when we breakdown the video analysis.

The problem, he's 2 weeks out and is coming out of an overreaching phase still. Even though he has shown all those improvements, his NMS is just recovering and supercompensating as evidenced by various jumps we measure.

This concept of overreaching is hard to fully accept for a few. He has to have that current 40 time. When he gets it and doesn't see that all time PR yet, he flips out. Literally. Loses all belief. Wants to throw everything in the training plan out the window. Wants to go find another speed coach to work magic.

So what do we do as coaches? For one we go back and review the plan we set. We remind him how we said this would happen and actually means everything is working. We show him the same progression for guys who have ran great PRs in the 40 in previous years training with us.

Still he's off the reservation.

So, we also breakout PLACEBO.  

Now most people have some idea of the placebo effect.  In a classic pharmaceutical study design, there is the group that gets the drug, the control group who gets nothing, and the group that gets the placebo .  The placebo is something that is inert.  It has no effect.  However, what has been documented for the last half 50 years is that the placebo group will probably show results.

"Whether you believe it will or won't work, you're right" is an old adage that sums it up.  The placebo effect is any phenomenon that occurs from a person’s belief and perceptions, rather than from the actual chemical-physiological effects of a drug.

Placebos can have a huge effect.  It is one of the confounding factors in many areas of medical research.  It's also a confounding factor in performance training.  What is really causing some of the results we see. 

If an athlete uses _____________(fill in the blank with any treatment or modality here) then after 3 weeks receiving it, they feel 90% better.  That's an effective treatment it seems.  Great!

Looks great until you realize that an athlete receiving what looks like the same treatment, but its a sham, and they still get 60% better.  A little confusing to what's really happening.  They feels 60% better, but the treatment/modality wasn't real so that's not why.

Now imagine there was a way (in pharmaceuticals this is easier) that a third athlete get the treatment but doesn't know it. takes the real drug, but they don’t know. (Maybe we do myofascial work while they sleep?) They only feel 30% better.

If we compare these three groups we can see that that 90% is actually 30% real effects plus 60% placebo.

OK, so the placebo effect is real. But this is training not a pharmaceutical study, right?  This is physical, you can't fake it can you?

Not so fast.  Watch this video.




Remember that NFL Combine athlete?  What ails him is doubt, so we breakout one of our tools to address it.

He mentions during the discussions that his hip was tight. 

"Really? Tell me more." "That could hold you back a little. Let's see the PT."   The PT finds that its a little tight like always. We know he has been convinced that he needs something "extra"and he's heard the hype that A.R.T. is amazing from some other guys.   So we schedule some A.R.T. on it for him.  We address the "hip issue" while also taking care of the normal recovery we'd planned. 

Walla!  When he runs again he sees improved times and is fired up again to get to the Combine.

Do we know if its the treatment or the placebo effect?  No.  

We know we trained him well and that the additional A.R.T. wouldn't hurt.  (don't misunderstand, I strongly believe in many soft tissue techniques including A.R.T.)  We allowed an opportunity for his beliefs in A.R.T. to help him.

Make sure you look at the entire picture.  The placebo effect is scientifically documented.  Don't forget it.

Soft Tissue Management: Whats Best?

Whats most important for your athletes to do for their recovery?  Stretching? Foam Rolling? Whole Body Vibration? A.R.T.? Modalities? Cold Tubs?

Should it be the ATCs, coaches, massage therapist, chiropractor, or physical therapist?
and on and on and on....

Certain coaches will argue that one or another from the above lists is the key.  They're all probably right in some case. 

I know I used to get too caught up in specific approaches.  This was very true in my earlier years as a coach when I was getting exposed to specific methods in the firstplace.  When you witness a good practitioner, who believe in what they are doing, and applies it consistently, you will see benefits.

As I kept (and still am) exposed to different methods, you start to get a more complete picture.  Forgot the names and various intial and trademarked systems, and start to think TISSUE QUALITY MANAGEMENT.

Thats what its about after all. Maintaining the integrity, capacity and functionality of the body's tissues. Muscle may lead many lists, but more and more people are realizing its also fascia, tendonous/bone junctions, and joint capsules. 

The beautiful part is that once you get beyond thinking just about one tissue, or one approach, you'll find its the combination that really gets results.  The best people I work with use a combination of methods.  The massage therapist who is doing as much stretching as soft tissue work.  The chiropractor who is doing myofascial work, with stretching, manipulation and active movement.  The performance coach who is having his athletes do specific, focused self myofascial work and then AIS stretching.

It's about getting the tissue to the quality required.  To allow the athlete to recover and be prepared for the next training session or competition.  That's the goal.  Tissue quality.

The Blind Men and the Elephant

Talk to a bunch of coaches, go online, or to a conference and you will get passionate arguments about the right way to train an athlete.  Each coach can give examples that fit their point of view.  In many ways though, it's a lot like this Indian fable...

One day, three blind men happened to meet each other and gossiped a long time about many things. Suddenly one of them recalled, " I heard that an elephant is a queer animal. Too bad we're blind and can't see it."


"Ah, yes, truly too bad we don't have the good fortune to see the strange animal," another one sighed.

The third one, quite annoyed, joined in and said, "See? Forget it! Just to feel it would be great."

"Well, that's true. If only there were some way of touching the elephant, we'd be able to know," they all agreed.


It so happened that a merchant with a herd of elephants was passing, and overheard their conversation. "You fellows, do you really want to feel an elephant? Then follow me; I will show you," he said.

After reaching their destination, the merchant asked them to sit on the ground and wait. In a few minutes he led the first blind man to feel the elephant. With outstretched hand, he touched first the left foreleg and then the right. After that he felt the two legs from the top to the bottom, and with a beaming face, turned to say, "So, the queer animal is just like that." Then he slowly returned to the group.


Then the second blind man was led to the rear of the elephant. He touched the tail which wagged a few times, and he exclaimed with satisfaction, "Ha! Truly a queer animal! Truly odd! I know now. I know." He hurriedly stepped aside.


The third blind man's turn came, and he touched the elephant's trunk which moved back and forth turning and twisting and he thought, "That's it! I've learned."


The three blind men thanked the merchant and went their way. Each one was secretly excited over the experience and had a lot to say, yet all walked rapidly without saying a word.

"Let's sit down and have a discussion about this queer animal," the second blind man said, breaking the silence.


"A very good idea. Very good." the other two agreed for they also had this in mind.


Without waiting for anyone to be properly seated, the second one blurted out, "This queer animal is like our straw fans swinging back and forth to give us a breeze. However, it's not so big or well made. The main portion is rather wispy."


"No, no!" the first blind man shouted in disagreement. "This queer animal resembles two big trees without any branches."


"You're both wrong." the third man replied. "This queer animal is similar to a snake; it's long and round, and very strong."

How they argued! Each one insisted that he alone was correct. Soon they came to blows over it, yet still there was no agreement.  Of course, there was no conclusion for not one had thoroughly examined the whole elephant. How can anyone describe the whole until he has learned the total of the parts.

Another modern version has a different ending a may fit may today's sports performance profession even more...

“We now know that the elephant is like a wall,” said the one who touched the side. “The evidence is conclusive.”to see what all the fuss was about. While the blind men were arguing fiercely, she examined the elephant. But instead of stopping after one feel, the prophet touched the whole thing, including the tail, which felt like a rope.

“I believe you are mistaken, sir," said the one who touched an ear. "The elephant is more like a large fan."

“You are both wrong,” said the leg man. “The creature is obviously like a tree.”

“A tree?” questioned the tusk toucher. “How can you mistake a spear for a tree?”

“What?” said the trunk feeler. “A spear is long and round, but anyone knows it doesn’t move. couldn’t you feel the muscles? It’s definitely a type of snake! A blind man could see that!” said the fifth blind man.

The argument grew more heated when along came a blind, self-declared prophet

“It’s just a big animal with big sides, ears, feet, tusk teeth, nose and a skinny tail,” she thought. “What a bunch of fools these guys are.”


Then the prophet said, “Stop! I have discovered the truth. I know who is right.”


Being a prophet and all, they stopped and listened and said, “tell us!” 

“I have examined the elephant with mine own two hands,” she said, “and I find that you are all right.”


“How can this be?” they asked. “Can an elephant be a wall and a fan and a tree and a spear and a

snake?” And they were very confused.


The prophet explained “the elephant is a great Tree, and on this tree grow leaves like great Fans to give most wondrous shade and fan the breeze. And the branches of this tree are like Spears to protect it.


For this is the Tree of Creation and of Eternal Life, and the Great Serpent hangs still upon it.


“Unfortunately, it is hidden behind a great Wall, which is why it was not discovered until this very
day. It cannot be reached by normal means.

“However I, in my wisdom, have discovered a Most Holy Rope, by which the wall may be climbed.


And if one touches the tree in the proper manner which I alone know, you will gain Eternal Life.”


They all became highly interested in this, of course.

The prophet then named an extremely high price for her services (or dvd or seminar), and made quite a bundle.

The college strength coach has a different perspective and environment than the physical therapist.  They both differ from the track coach and what he sees.  This is different than the performance coach in a private facility and different than the personal trainer.

Next time when someone has a different answer, try and consider their perspective, and keep the possibility open that they have seen something you haven't. 

Beware of the strength and performance gurus who have the absolute answer and will share it for the right price.  Especially when they haven't proven their worth with anything but the intern.