Tag Archive: acceleration

1. The fundamentals of acceleration mechanics

   30th June 2014 10:55 am 2 Comments

   “I have spent my whole life devoted to writing 1 good programme”

   Vince Anderson, Texas A&M sprints coach at GAIN VII.

   Coach Anderson was talking about his 100m speed training programme. His belief is that coaches only need to teach 1 model of sprint mechanics, get damn good at it, then add “subtle variations“when required, for example, in the 200 meters acceleration pattern or the 110 meter hurdles acceleration pattern

   When dealing with athletes, he uses a basic language. All other patterns come from that. It is hard enough for athletes to get good at 1 model, let alone several different types.

   So while we may look of “sport specific speed training” in reality it all comes down to acceleration training first, then application second.

   The 100 meter acceleration pattern, because it requires maximal intensity, provides the aggressive pattern language necessary for coach and athlete to work from.

   This seminar then concentrated on how his model works, and more importantly, how he coaches it.

   Common Problems in 100 m sprint training

   Anderson describes himself as a “reactive coach” he “coaches to the problem I see“. Here are some of the problems he encounters in sprinters and how he attempts to solve them.

   • Too little body lean: they fail to push well or deep enough at the start. This causes them to come upright too early.
   • Failing to continue to accelerate to maximal; IF they manage to get upright into a sprinting posture.
   • Trying to claim territory: athletes step out, instead of stepping down. It should feel exactly like marching in place.

   The 100m race is often broken down into phases for analysis. Whilst this may be useful for the coach to understand, it just adds complexity to the athlete. As Anderson says “My athletes can’t handle complexity“.

   He describes the well run 100m as a holistic event. It is like a symphony or harmony without rhythm breaks. However, unlike an Orchestral movement, the 100m is a race of seamless aggression and smooth violence with big ranges of motion.

   The start requires awareness and patience, it is easy to mistakenly use small quick actions. Instead think “The faster the run, the longer the push“.

   “Don’t let the smooth taste fool you; sprinters have to work so much harder than they think.”

   One anecdote Anderson related was of one of his athletes putting effort into a training run and exclaiming “I’m exhausted“! Well, the 100m is a maximal effort event: it should be tiring.

   He uses “Acceleration” and “pushing” interchangeably as part of his coaching vernacular. Whilst it is impossible to accelerate for the whole race, you can PUSH for the whole race.

   Anderson uses a visualisation technique of gently ascending lines, which then rise to vertical. The athlete thinks about this before training. He then places a cone at 30m and the athlete has to get to vertical at this point. By using a referential cue like this, the athlete gets used to doing things longer and harder.

   When they get upright they have to think “PUSH DOWN“.

   Coaching Cues for the 100 metre race

   Anderson has developed some very clear coaching cues he uses with athletes. The Intent is to develop consistency on 4 fronts:

   1. Maximum velocity mechanics (run tall).
   2. Acceleration (pushing the whole race).
   3. Completion runs (blending the two).
   4. Apply to every run (pattern development).

   Intent is everything in this race. “Any kid that can step down with extreme prejudice and get tall can run faster. It’s not a talent issue.”

   (I hope P.E. teachers out there are paying attention: ANY kid can run faster).

   The classic over reaching/ over striding that is seen is called “Casting” by Anderson. This leads to a longer ground contact time and therefore slower speed. Placing the foot down under the hip each time is the solution.

   A 400m runner or half miler still have the same running mechanics: they still step down. But, they step down less hard, so the thigh recovers lower.

   Things to avoid include:

   The step out, cast foot, cast and grab or a “small, choppy stride“. Part of the problem is that athletes (and coaches) misinterpret the classic A/B drills as technical drills instead of the strengthening drills which was their original purpose.

   Anderson called sprinting “The second worst culture in athletics, behind basketball“! Every element of the culture enables bad things to be done. It enables lack of modern thinking and “reinforces street mythology, ancient history and bad information.”

   As a result, athlete use context as “an excuse to stay in dysfunction“. It is the coaches job to fix this.

   “Good posture always wins”

   (Declaring confirmation bias here, as I always tell my athletes the importance of good posture: “Turn up, try hard, stand tall“).

   According to Anderson, running is:

   • A series of precisely intentional ground strikes.
   • The sworn enemy of landing or striding.
   • The opposite of striding.

   He uses a series of postural drills against a wall for his athletes to help develop. Anderson calls the position coming out of the start the “Post” as in “straight as a fence post“ (I refer to it as SLX: Straight Line Acceleration, adapted from Jack Blatherwick).

   (Frans Bosch had made similar points 2 years previously at GAIN about running posture).

   Getting out of the blocks

   Anderson trains his sprinters on Acceleration from Day 1(remember Accn= pushing) and he teaches them to apply this on every run. That way they are developing a pattern.

   Coming out of the blocks is like a “shock jump“; the harder you push from the blocks, the longer it takes to come up into an upright posture.

   This harder push causes a more acute post position (SLX) which is only effective if the athlete has the ability to maintain this posture throughout.

   The athlete should continue to “push through the post”. This requires concentration and keeping the shoulders up.

   If the shoulders are down and you push hard, you fall over. “Force can’t turn a corner” so if you bend at the hips, you limit force application.

   “Acceleration never, ever stumbles.”

   Anderson then spent some time looking at the start position and showed a great picture using an equilateral triangle superimposed over the correct position for an athlete to get into the set position. This is an inherently stable position from which to start.

   For field sports athletes, a 3 point stance can be used to achieve the same position. Jevon Kearse does this well (he is also a “super, foul tempered, aggresive athlete”).

   Many athletes that Anderson sees struggle with the start from the blocks. “The problem is NOT that we athletes that have too great a spatial awareness“.  Every decision he makes as a coach is designed to make it easier for the athlete to know where their body is.

   He sometimes starts athletes from a Post position with his hands on their shoulders, to eliminate the problem with the rise. Keeping the head in a neutral position is also a useful cue.

   “Try to avoid all stylistic tendencies. I use common sense.”

   Summary

   It was very refreshing to hear a coach of this standard say things like “our job is to make everyone better“, “coach without judgement” and “coach your ass off on their behalf“. 

   I have seen several track and field coaches “cherry pick” athletes from other schools or training groups who could already run fast. But, one of the joys of coaching is to be able to coach the process, rather than just get the result.

   Coach Anderson exemplifies a coach who is striving to get the best from ALL his athletes, and also himself. He turned up to Gary Winckler’s practical session in the gym the day before to learn: another sign of a great coach.

   I have already applied some of these coaching cues in my speed training sessions, with the athletes responding well.

   Recommended highly.

   Further Reading

   • Force, power and acceleration: thoughts from Jack Blatherwick.
   • How can I sprint quicker?: 7 key areas to work on.
   • Run Faster Book

2. Force, power or acceleration?

   13th May 2013 1:38 pm 15 Comments

   “What is power?”

   Was my opening question at yesterday’s Continuing Professional Development (CPD) workshop for strength and conditioning coaches.

   “Force times velocity” was the text book response from the ex- students.

   They are of course technically correct, but how does this affect how we train our athletes? What about momentum, force, impulse, velocity, mass and acceleration?

   Powerlifters are powerful (high force, low velocity) as are gymnasts (low force, high velocity). Most sports people fall somewhere in between these extremes, or use different parts within their sport.

   Applying power

   The workshop was split into three parts:

   1. Terminology and theory: I went through this in some detail and based it on questions I have been asking since I saw Jack Blatherwick present two years ago at GAIN (see below).
   2. Practical exercises to develop acceleration. This included detail look at the snatch and assistant exercises to help develop the snatch. I also covered runs, jumps and throws for the “application” cornerstone.
   3. Programme design: the coaches had prepared a 4 week programme to develop power and they shared and discussed this in small groups.

   (One interesting question came up: velocity is a vector quantity, it has a direction. If power was force times speed, then the direction of travel would be irrelevant. So, if we develop power in one direction, why would that apply in another?)

   “What are the best ways to train for acceleration of body weight?”

   As part of my preparation for the workshop I trying to find research that was both current and measured what we are trying to train (rather than some abstract concept only lab technicians are interested in).

   I contacted Jack Blatherwick hoping he might point me in the right direction, instead he was kind enough to respond with his thoughts:

   Coaches: Trust your logic. Some research and propaganda is misleading.
   I do not want to leave the impression that a coach should avoid research. Read everything you can, but do it knowing there is likely to be something incorrect or misleading along with those things that are helpful.

   There’s something good in every article, even the worst pseudoscience … but misleading information is quite prevalent in current popular thoughts about Power and Force.

   Acceleration = Speed, Quickness, and Agility

   What is ‘Acceleration?’ In kinematics (the most basic topic in Physics, dealing with movement), ‘Acceleration’ is defined as any change in velocity, encompassing all changes in direction and speed.

   Agility is included in this definition, because we associate agility in sports with quick changes in direction, like cutting sharply to dodge around an opponent, or perhaps cornering at high speed on the hockey rink.

   Speed is also included, because even at relatively constant speed, there is deceleration and acceleration with each stride. Horizontal acceleration of body weight is therefore one of the highest priorities in sports that feature
   speed, quickness, and agility.

   In other words, for this priority, the critical question is: “What are the best ways to train for acceleration of body weight?”
   However, for some reason, throughout history, coaches asked for research on Force and Power, and this has led to training advice that might not be the best fit for acceleration of body weight.

   Kinetics

   Their question seems entirely logical, and advances the discussion to ‘Kinetics,’ the second basic topic in physics, because we are certainly accelerating a mass.

   Therefore, Force and Power would seem to be logical extensions of our question: “What are the best ways to train for acceleration of body weight?”

   But … it is an absurd thought (which no one intended) that nerves and muscles might understand the following abstractions:

   • Force = Mass x Acceleration
   • Power = Energy Expenditure / Time = Work / Time = Force x Distance / Time = Force x Velocity

   Nerves and muscles only understand (and remember!):

   • (a) how fast they have been trained.
   • (b) through what range of motion.
   • (c) how much effort this takes.

   That is called SPECIFICITY, the principle that performance is enhanced when the training ‘looks and feels’ like the desired outcome (my simplistic definition, not to be blamed on anyone else).

   Therefore, if ACCELERATION is a priority for our sport, and we use the abstraction (F=ma) we are not violating any formulas from physics … but we might be wrong.
   Consider the continuum (Force = Mass x Acceleration) that represents various speeds and weights, along which we might choose our training exercises:

   

   The thought is that to improve acceleration we must increase Force, and strength coaches love to do this by increasing the mass we lift in the weight room. But, of course, the more mass we lift, the slower the acceleration. Might this be considered a good way to train for slow acceleration?

   Please don’t misunderstand my purpose. I believe in lifting weights – sometimes heavy weights, at an appropriate age and level of fitness. But, it is obvious that we must also incorporate more training in which we accelerate our body mass as quickly as we can.

   Complex Training

   Furthermore, in every weightlifting exercise, there is a deceleration (to zero velocity) toward the end of the range of motion. This occurs at precisely the moment when sprinting and skating require an explosive acceleration.

   Considering that we are ALWAYS forming neuromuscular habits when we train, there should NEVER be a phase of the year in which we exclude quick acceleration from the program, and just work on strength.

   In fact, I believe every strength exercise should be accompanied in some way with an explosive exercise featuring acceleration: jumps, weighted jumps, sprints, hills, sleds.

   Neuromuscular learning occurs with every movement. Myelin is being formed along axons which innervate muscle fibres that are training at high speed.

   Timing is a critical part of athletic development, and slow training – if overdone – will certainly not enhance quickness, agility, and speed.

   Peak power?

   The simplest word (acceleration) for our highest priority has been needlessly replaced by Force and Power.

   The word ‘POWER’ has so many colloquial uses that it is often misinterpreted in communications between the physics (biomechanics) lab and the important group of users: athletes and coaches.

   One question that has been examined for decades is: “What is the optimum amount of weight to be incorporated into a training exercise to maximize power?” Research is inconclusive, but many believe the optimum weight should be about 30% of a maximum lift with one repetition (1RM).

   How important is this question for sports that depend on speed, quickness, and agility?

   If the question had been: “What is the optimum weight to lift to maximize ACCELERATION?”  The answer is “Zero. Just use bodyweight.”

   Many coaches and athletes (as well as scientists and professors) incorrectly believe that explosiveness or explosive starts from a standstill are where athletes demonstrate the greatest power, like exploding out of the starting blocks.

   But, looking at the equation Power = Force x Velocity, it is easy to see that there needs to be substantial velocity for Power to be a maximum. Of course there also needs to be a high rate of acceleration as well,because Force = mass x acceleration (F=ma).

   Think of it this way: If an athlete accelerates at the same rate between zero and 5 miles per hour as he does between 5-10 mph, his Power is greater from 5-10, because velocity is greater.
   Usain Bolt’s graph of velocity vs. time (modified from IAAF data), demonstrates this point clearly.

   His maximum power does not occur at the start. That is where acceleration is greatest. Power does not peak until a couple of seconds into the sprint where both acceleration and velocity are high.

   Explosive movement from a standstill is not where an athlete expresses peak power. When we observe a dragster take off at the start, it is common to use the word ‘powerful.’ But the dragster exerts much greater power somewhere later in the race.

   Training Programme Design

   ACCELERATION is the correct and simplest word for quickness and agility, and this is the highest priority in many sports, except where the athlete has to move large external masses.

   In designing training programs, keep in mind the objective. If the athlete needs to accelerate his own body weight to be successful, there should be a lot of that in training programs.

   Heavy strength training is slow acceleration. That does not mean it is wrong, but it must be accompanied by the fast acceleration of body weight (as seen in the video below of midfielder, Sam Malcolm: note the single-leg landing and push-off).

   Jack Blatherwick

   Thanks very much to Jack for that excellent advice. We kept touching upon training principles yesterday: coaches like doing what they are comfortable with as well as what the physical constraints of their “weights room” dictates.

   Reminding ourselves constantly that we are trying to develop better athletes, rather than solely bigger numbers in the gym is crucial!

   Please leave your thoughts below (with name).

   • How to take charge of your fitness training 

3. Power, acceleration and force: GAIN review 5

   22nd August 2011 9:57 am 7 Comments

   “Some research can’t interpret it’s own data, sometimes that data is wrong.”

   Jack Blatherwick opened my eyes with 2 great lectures. The first was on Acceleration, the second on research. He had some great visual slides, that just explained things very clearly. There was a constant sound of “oh, I see….” From around the room as people began to grasp hitherto poorly understood subjects.

   Not sure I can do it justice…

   Power…or acceleration?

   “Acceleration: more specifically, horizontal acceleration of body weight. The simplest and most accurate description from physics for explosiveness; quickness, agility and even speed. The words “power” and “force” can be misleading- not always, of course. Be a little suspicious. Trust your gut reaction.”  This was the start of the physics lecture.

   Does research that indicate heavier loads are necessary to generate power actually measure force instead?

   Most of you will know that

                       Force = Mass x Acceleration.

                                        F=ma

   But have a look at this continuum with the same amount of force being produced.

   F= Ma   ———————————————-  F=mA

    

   Powerlifting    Olympic weight lifting                                  Sprinting

   Body building                                          Sprinting with

   equipment

   Studies that show Olympic weightlifting produces high force, but they may forget to say that the centre of gravity does not move fast. The object is to get the bar to move fast.

   Conversely, using faster movements with out external load (extra mass) does create force too. If:

                           Power = Force x velocity

   then

                                       P= (ma)v

   In 100 metre running, greatest Power occurs 2-4 seconds into the run, due to the Velocity being greater. The greatest acceleration occurs at the beginning of the run.

   Which, if you rearrange the equation you come up with: A = F/m    Right?

   “Acceleration is more about how you apply the force, rather than how much force you can apply.”

   So, linked into the work from Bosch and Winckler, Acceleration is more about how you apply strength, rather than how much strength you have.

   Blatherwick uses the term Straight Line Extension (SLX) rather than triple extension when coaching the speed training. It is important to be able to apply the force when leaning, as the horizontal component is greater than the vertical component in this stage.

   From a start position, he coaches “Extend with a high head, the hips will follow” and uses lean starts where the body has to learn to lean in a straight line.

   He then proceeded to show a lot of his training methodology and drills on video clips. Using a lot of specially built (but homemade) kit, he looked to develop the acceleration and strength of his ice hockey players in different planes of movement. This was excellent stuff. Again, he starts slowly and builds up to avoid injuries.  He summed it up with:

   Functional Training: Integrate rather than isolate. 

    A note on Research and the use of Stats

   Blatherwick did a great presentation on the poor use of stats when working with athletes and also in research. I will be using some of this in upcoming blogs, but it is worrying that what is Dogma out there in academic land, is actually based on dodgy research and interpretation. Funny that the academics claim to have “science” on their side!

   (More on theory and practice behind Jack Blatherwick’s overspeed training).

   Kelvin Giles made reference to the “random number gatherers” in sport science, and how easy it is to fall into this trap.

   Next Planning and Summary