I previously stated that this type of training progression would be beneficial for developing work capacity due the increased density of each subsequent workout progression. So a good starting point would be to take a look at what is meant by the terms 'work capacity' and 'training density'.
Sprint coach Tom Crick recently decribed work capacity as 'the ability to tolerate a certain volume or density of a specific task and recover sufficiently in order to repeat that task in the next training session'.
Training density is the amount of work that is performed within a given time period. There are essentially two ways in which training density can be increased:
1) Perform a greater amount of work within the same time period.
2) Perform the same amount of work, but within a shorter time period.
It is clear to see that the workout progressions provided by Frank Horwill, which I previously outlined, result in an increased level of training density by decreasing the amount of time in which the same amount of work is performed.
On a side note, an example of a training system that increases training density by increasing the amount of work peformed within the same time period is the Escalating Density Training Method. This training system, created by Charles Staley, is effetive in developing muscular hypertrophy. The protocol involves performing two separate strength training exercises in alternating fashion, back and forth, for a period of 20 minutes. The aim is simply to perform as many repetitions of each exercise as possible within the 20 minute time period and then to improve on the number of repetitions performed during each subsequent workout.
So how does increasing the training density in the manners described above devlop work capacity?
By increasing the density of a workout we are essentially making it more demanding. This has the potential to increase the level of fatigue experienced following the session. As a result, it would not seem logical to expect this type of training progression to result in the athlete being able to tolerate a greater number of these workouts within a given time period.
However, the concept of work capacity can be applied to within workouts as well as between workouts. By developing the ability to recover between repetitions/sets that are performed at a specific intensity an athlete is improving their 'within workout work capacity'.
But why should we be so concerned about developing greater levels of work capacity at specific exercise intensities?
If we go back to interval training for middle distance running performance, we have outlined two quite distinct methods.
The traditional method of interval training involves consistantly performing workouts with the same number repetitions (over the same distances and with the same recoveries). The progression is achieved by increasing the speed for the repetitions, which means the focus is not on developing work capacity at a specific intensity (speed). The incremental method of interval training achieves progression by increasing the work: rest ratio whilst maintaining the same running speed/exercise intensity.
The benefit of the latter method would be that the athlete is constantly developing a greater efficiency and becoming more economical at the specific running speed he is ultimately aiming to race at. However, one thing we know about running economy is that it responds very well to high volumes of training at the specific training intensities in which we are attempting to the develop this quality.
So perhaps we would be better off looking at ways we can develop between workout work capacity? This would enable more frequent exposure to the specific running speeds we are trying to develop which in turn will result in a greater volume of work being performed at such intensities?
0 comments:
Post a Comment