If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
A temendous emphasis on this type of training is made by coaches and much time and effort given by sprinters. Maybe the shoes, track surfaces and other "aids" are really the reason for the small incremental improvement.
Very few sprinters, if any, strength trained in a way that is even remotely similar to the methods of today. Most often, if they lifted at all, they would lift relatively light weights for high reps(10+). Back in the sixties many were afraid to squat because of the work/"research" done by Karl Klein at the university of Texas citing problems brought on by performing squats in training, much of which has since been refuted. Additionally, many coaches did not see how strength training could positively affect speed-particularly from an accelerative standpoint. They did not realize that some max strength work could train the athlete to be able to recruit more total and high threshold motor units in order to increase power output and consequently speed.
The focus back then, if any with weights, was on increasing external movement speed with weights and the classic, primitive belief that lifting heavy weights would always make one slow and bulky. People also viewed squats as too unspecific and general to apply to sprinting which is why many during this time who did use weights tried to invent weight exercise which would directly mimic the actions and positions of sprinting.
Without knowing specific training regimens, I have long thought that Carl Lewis was at least close to the first American to train as hard as some European sprinters (part. Borzov) had.
I can't cite a specific reference for it, but I'm left with the feeling that when Harvey Glance emerged bigtime as a frosh in '76 that some big lifting numbers came w/ his cv.
Even more surprising about the views of weight lifting in the 1950s were those of Football coaches. In 1959 Harrison Rosdahl became the first NJ high school athlete to throw 60 ft in the shot put. He was recruited by Penn State to play Football. Upon visiting the school he told them about all of the weight work he had done in high school. His track coach was way ahead of his time. The Penn St. Football staff felt that lifting was counterproductive. Rosdahl who had lifted since 9th grade insisted that he must continue lifting. They gave him dispensation to do so. That was where college Football was in those days!
Interestingly, Penn State's conditioning program still remains behind the times as they along with Michigan are two of the few teams in all of college football to use the HIT system. Such programs are very primitive and outdated.
It's not all that many years ago that John Elway was playing in the Yankee farm system and the head scout gave him a negative review saying that all the weighlifting he had done was going to leave him "musclebound" (loved that myth) and would compromise his throwing ability. This the guy who could throw a football through a brick wall.
Remember watching a Carl Lewis training video. He described his workout as a little stretching and weight lifting. Always got the impression that Tellez's emphasis was mostly on technique?
The greatest arguement against weight training leaving an athelte muscle-bound is found in men's gymnastics. Incredibly powerful and well-built guys who are as flexible as Gumby. (The little green guy, not the Monty Python guys who beat themselves in the heads with bricks.)
Comment