Techniques May 2015 by Renaissance Publishing

contents

Volume 8 Number 4 / May 2015

in every issue

4 A Letter from the President 5 USTFCCCA Presidents

FEATURES

8 The Nature of Speed

Enhancing sprint abilities through a short to long training approach.

Brad H. DeWeese EdD, Matt. L. Sams, MA, Joel H. Williams, Chris Bellon, MS

26 Discus Throw Essentials

Mechanics for the Practitioner and the Thrower

Dr. Andreas Maheras

34 Triple Jump Practice Parameters

Four practice parameters in successful triple jump for beginners, advanced and professional track and field athletes

Iliyan Chamov

44 Aerobic Power

Building a Bigger Engine in an Emerging Miler

Scott Christensen

AWARDS

55 USTFCCCA National Indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year 56 Division I: USTFCCCA Regional Indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year 58 Division II: USTFCCCA Regional Indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year 60 Division III: USTFCCCA Regional Indoor Coaches & Athletes of the Year 62 2015 Junior College Track & Field and Indoor Coaches of the Year

COVER

Photograph courtesy of Kirby Lee

MAY 2015 techniques

A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT

he 2015 outdoor track and field season is winding down as is my term as your President. It’s been an incredibly quick two years that have left me with a sense of accomplishment while at the same time realizing that there is so, so much more work to be done to move our sports forward. It’s been very well documented that we are entering uncharted territory in regards to the changes to collegiate athletics already in place and those yet to come. As an organization, the USTFCCCA works daily gathering information to help all of us navigate through this maze of changes and help us position our programs on solid ground going forward. In this space in the February issue of techniques I talked about the need for all of us to work prove to our administrators, alumni and community that our programs are relevant. I cannot stress this point enough, it’s up to us to make this happen. It’s not enough to have a conference champion in the long jump or 1500 or that a new school record was set last weekend. We simply can’t focus all of our attention on the track, we must think of ways to bring positive attention to our programs and make sure the decision makers in our universities are aware of the great things happening within our programs. While there are challenges ahead, there are also some very significant positive things happening within our sports and association. Through a cooperative effort of the USTFCCCA, the NCAA and ESPN, changes to the NCAA Division I Men’s and Women’s Outdoor Track & Field Championship meet schedule were worked out allowing all four days of the championship to be televised live on the networks of ESPN. This marks the first time in the history of the meet that all four days will be televised live! If there is truth to the old saying that “there is strength in numbers,” then the USTFCCCA has gotten much stronger over the course of the past several months with the addition of the programs of the NAIA and the NJCAA. The coaches associations of both of these organizations voted last year to become full-fledged members of the association and began conducting their business meetings at the USTFCCCA convention in Phoenix this past December. The USTFCCCA national office is already working to raise the profile of the NAIA and NJCAA programs through rankings, regional awards and regular press releases that highlight all of the great things happening within those two organizations. Finally, I would like to say what an honor and privilege it has been serving as your President for the past two years. The opportunity to work with the other members of the USTFCCCA Board of Directors, the national office staff and the many other individuals that have a vested interest in our sports has been truly rewarding. I’m humbled when I think about others that have held this post and that our member coaches had the confidence in me to put me in this position. I’m also leaving with a sense of great confidence that our new President, Damon Martin, will serve our organization and member coaches effectively. Being in this position has provided me with the opportunity to engage in many enlightening, inspiring and sometimes frustrating, conversations with coaches, administrators and fans of our sport. Whether I agreed with a particular viewpoint or not, I am left with the sense that there are an enormous number of people who are very passionate about our sports. It’s our job as stakeholders to focus this passion and bring constructive ideas and dialog to the table that will insure that the sports that we have devoted much of lives to not only survive but thrive.

Beth Alford-Sullivan President, USTFCCCA Beth is the Director of Men’s and Women’s Track & Field and Cross Country at the University of Tennessee. Beth can be reached at basullivan@tennessee.edu .

techniques MAY 2015

Publisher Sam Seemes Executive Editor Mike Corn Contributing Editor Sylvia Kamp DIRECTOR OF MEDIA, BROADCASTING AND ANALYTICS Tom Lewis DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS

Kyle Terwillegar COMMUNICATIONS ASSISATANT

Dennis Young Membership Services Dave Svoboda Photographer Kirby Lee Editorial Board Tommy Badon,

Boo Schexnayder, Derek Yush

Published by Renaissance Publishing LLC 110 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Suite 123, Metairie, LA 70005 (504) 828-1380 myneworleans.com USTFCCCA

National Office 1100 Poydras Street, Suite 1750 New Orleans, LA 70163 Phone: 504-599-8900 Fax: 504-599-8909 Techniques (ISSN 1939-3849) is published quarterly in February, May, August and November by the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association. Copyright 2014. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publisher. techniques is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, photos and artwork even if accompanied by a self-addressed stamped envelope. The opinions expressed in techniques are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the magazines’ managers or owners. Periodical Postage Paid at New Orleans La and Additional Entry Offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: USTFCCCA, PO Box 55969, Metairie, LA 700555969. If you would like to advertise your business in techniques, please contact Mike Corn at (504) 599-8900 or mike@ustfccca.org.

ustfccca PRESIDENTs DIVISION I DENNIS SHAVER

NCAA Division I Track and Field Dennis Shaver is the Head Men’s and Women’s Track and Field Coach at Louisiana State University. Dennis can be reached at shaver@lsu.edu.

sean cleary

NCAA Division I Cross Country Sean Cleary is the Head Women’s Track and Field and Cross Country coach at West Virginia University. Sean can be reached at Sean.Cleary@mail.wvu.edu.

DIVISION II james reid

NCAA Division II Track and Field James Reid is the Head Track and Field Coach and Assistant Athletic Director at Angelo State University. James can be reached at james.reid@angelo.edu.

Scott Lorek

NCAA Division II Cross Country Scott Lorek is Head Men’s and Women’s Track and Field and Cross Country coach at Northwest Missouri State University. Scott can be reached at slorek@nwmissouri.edu.

DIVISION III Gary Aldrich

NCAA Division III Track and Field Gary is the Associate Head Track & Field Coach at Carnegie Melon University and can be reached at galdrich@andrew.cmu.edu

Robert Shankman

NCAA Division III Cross Country Robert is the Head Cross Country and Track & Field coach at Rhodes College and can be reached at shankman@ rhodes.edu

MAY 2015 techniques

The nature Enhancing sprint abilities through a short to long training approach.

techniques FEBURARY 2015

of speed

Brad H. DeWeese EdD | Matt. L. Sams, MA | Joel H. Williams | Chris Bellon, MS kirby lee photo FEBRUARY 2015 techniques

the nature of speed

he desire to outrun the competition is a trademark of many sporting endeavors. While there is compelling evidence sprint speed is ultimately limited by an athlete’s genetics (Vincent et al. 2007), optimal training can improve their competitive chances (Ahmetov et al., 2011, Gineviciene et al., 2011, Niemi & Majamaa et al., 2005, Scott et al., 2010). Interestingly, while continuing research efforts have refined our knowledge on the founding constructs of speed, the practical utilization of this information with regard to sound programming methods attempting to maximize sprint ability have received little commentary. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to introduce a theoretical model for the planning of speed development, namely the short to long (S2L) approach to program design.

aims to enhance competitive ability through a more strategic addition and retention of fitness phases. Conjugate Sequential programming parallels block programming with the utilization of concentrated loads, but further supports the retention of previously developed fitness qualities through the adoption of “retaining loads.” These retaining loads are established to either maintain the previous block’s agenda or introduce a future block’s concentrated load. For example, while a coach may concentrate the load on the development of maximum velocity, they may choose to maintain accelerative abilities with reduced volumes. In addition, a coach may prescribe minimal practice volumes to introduce top-speed endurance as a tertiary goal. These primary, secondary, and tertiary goals are established in such a way that the athlete is prepared for a dense competition schedule and is never too far removed from their optimal level of readiness.

1.1 A Brief Overview on Programming Tactics While a detailed discussion on training theory is beyond the scope of this paper, an overview on periodization and programming is provided to further support the need for properly aligned fitness phases. In the performance setting, the design of a practice and competition plan is guided by the tenets of periodization. Specifically, periodization has been defined as the strategic manipulation of an athlete’s preparedness through the employment of separate, yet sequenced training phases. These training phases are established to mature various fitness qualities in a timely manner through a cycled and staged workload. Generally, these sequenced training phases graduate from a more general scope to a specific aim as the athlete nears the crux of competition. In addition, the workload undulates in a manner that balances the relationship between training-induced fatigue and accommodation (DeWeese et al., 2013). To adhere to the tenants of periodization, coaches can choose from a variety of programming methodologies. These programming tactics are similar in that most advocate a variation of the workload throughout the training year so that competitive abilities are maximized. However, a primary variance within programming “philosophies” is how fitness phases are blended. For instance, traditional programming advocates that periods of training should be developed to enhance singular components of fitness (work capacity, strength endurance, strength, power), ultimately building toward a major competition. Unfortunately, modern competition schedules prevent this long, deliberately unilateral development pattern. Evolving from this traditional model, Block programming attempts to address a more dense competition schedule by merging a traditional approach with briefer periods of “fitness phases.” These blocks of time allow for the accumulation, transmutation and realization of a fitness parameter (Issurin, 2008). Similar to the traditional model, adopters of a block system develop specific components of fitness through the incorporation of “concentrated loads.” Concentrated loads are defined as short periods of time (typically four weeks) where one training quality is emphasized. In other words, most of the training time is spent on improving that lone parameter (for instance, acceleration). These segmented blocks of priority are then aligned in a complementary manner in hopes of bolstering future periods of time as competition nears. These blocks could then be cycled as an athlete prepares for a subsequent competition. Building from block, an advanced method of programming 10

techniques MAY 2015

1.2 Conjugate Sequential Programming for Speed Within the world of speed development, there are two traditionally supported avenues in the training process: “long to short” and “short to long.” Long to short (L2S) essentially describes a method of enhancing speed that begins with longer sprint distances that decrease in length as the training year progresses. In addition, an athlete training in a L2S program will typically see their prescribed training speeds gradually increase as the repetition distances shorten. The overarching belief is that a L2S program provides an athlete the opportunity to enhance their work capacity (“base”) before taking part in more specific efforts. Proponents of L2S argue that the improved work capacity leads to refined physiological and metabolic conditions such as lactate clearance, capillarization, and resynthesis of Creatine Phosphate (Weston et al., 1996, MacDougall et al., 1998, Forbes, Slade, & Meyer et al., 2008). As a result, the athlete taking part in long training at the beginning of the season can efficiently exert more work at high intensities, and in theory, possesses a body that is more resilient against fatigue. This design may improve an athlete’s power endurance or ability to run within a given zone or pace (Billat, 2001a & 2001b). In contrast, short to long (S2L) refers to a training program that emphasizes shorter sprint distances at the beginning of the year, followed by a lengthening of repetition distances as the training season matures. Advocates of this system contend that speed cannot be built off of endurance; rather, maximum velocity is the result of a refined ability to accelerate. In other words, if an athlete can extend their acceleration zone, they may reach a higher terminal velocity later in the race. This higher top end speed would perhaps provide a greater point from which to “drop” at the onset of fatigue. From here, speed endurance may be optimally developed from the creation of a “speed reserve.” The creation of a speed reserve suggests that successful longer-distance sprints, (200-400m competitive distances) are the result of running segments of the race at a velocity that is lower than the absolute maximum that could be achieved in a shorter race (60m-100m). In essence, the speed reserve is the culmination of a training process that first creates higher running velocities which then allow the athlete an opportunity to run longer sprint distances at a “submaximal” pace. This theory has gained support from Weyand and colleagues (2003, 2005) who have demonstrated that a reduction in sprint performance is not the result of cellular energy availability but is related

the nature of speed Figure 1: Basic Underpinnings of Sprint Speed

to muscle force output, which diminishes as sprint distance increases.

into the sprint position” (Francis, 1992).

2.1 Force Delivery 2. Foundational Constructs of Speed As Ross, Leveritt, & Rick (2001) remind us, successful performances in the sprint events are based on an athlete’s (1) ability to accelerate, (2) magnitude of maximum velocity and (3) ability to maintain velocity against the onset of fatigue. As such, it can be inferred that an athlete who accelerates well can attain higher velocities during the “top speed” portion of a sprint when training provides an optimal stimulus for the neurological and metabolic systems. Irrespective of training philosophy, it can be demonstrated that gravity, wind and ground reaction forces work to limit the sprinting athlete (Hunter, Marshall, & McNair, 2005). Of these three aforementioned factors, ground reaction force (GRF) is the only variable that can be controlled by the athlete. In short, GRF are the forces exerted by the ground on a moving body. Within speed development, manipulations to GRF can be made through corrective changes in a sprinter’s biomechanics. In other words, a sprinter’s ability to properly direct force into the ground and subsequently receive and utilize reactive forces may be improved through training and optimized biomechanics. These biomechanical efficiencies can be enhanced and stabilized through the correct staging of speed and strength development strategies that seamlessly blend together through phase potentiation. As the late Charlie Francis stated, “Absolute strength, strength balance, and power must be developed before an athlete is able to get 12

techniques MAY 2015

Sprinting is best described as a volitional activity that represents how fast an athlete can displace their mass in a linear direction through a rapid, un-paced, maximal run that lasts less than 15 seconds (Ross et al., 2001). This rapid locomotion requires the swift production of force. Specifically, much research has demonstrated that effective sprinting is largely the result of high rates of force development (RFD) which can be defined as the change in force divided by the change in time (Stone et al., 2003). Weyand and colleagues (2000, 2010) have demonstrated that elite sprinters separate themselves from their slower counterparts through the production of high forces within a minimal ground contact, or stance phase. In other words, an accomplished sprinter will spend less time on the ground than their competitors. During this abbreviated ground contact, better sprinters utilize higher force production to displace their body horizontally down the track, which can be described as their stride length. Interestingly enough, while leading to a greater stride length, this shortened stance phase and delivery of force into the ground does not result in a more rapid recovery of the swing leg in faster sprinters (Weyand et al., 2001). In fact, sprinters of both elite and average levels demonstrate similar rates of recovery between steps. Furthermore, due to large amounts of force production, elite sprinters tend to leave the ground quickly at toe off (Mann, 2013) preventing triple extension when observing the “back side mechanics.” This quick, forceful foot-strike allows the

legs to turnover more frequently. This biomechanical advantage results in a faster stride rate, which provides a more continuous opportunity to place force into the ground. While sprinters spend most of their time “above the track,” the only way you can continue horizontal movement is through rapid, ballistic force production. Perhaps as a result of the longer stride length and shorter foot strike, better sprinters demonstrate greater hip flexion at the terminal portion of the recovery phase which may provide a greater angle of attack during the upcoming ground contact. This is commonly noted as the “higher knee” of what is termed the “front-side” portion of sprinting mechanics that provides the sprinter with a chance to properly direct vertical forces into the ground during foot contact (Mann 2013, Clark 2014). Moreover, coaches anecdotally describe the sounds of a fast sprinter’s foot strike as sounding like a large “pop” or “bang” which supports the forceful impact as a result of optimized leg positioning. (See Figure 1)

3.0 Muscular Mechanisms This optimized delivery of force and quick ground contact allow the sprinter to take advantage of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC), which can be described as the rapid and forceful lengthening of a muscle-tendon complex followed by an immediate shortening or contraction (Komi, 2008). This provides efficiency of movement, which may result in a more economical usage of ATP and energy substrates (Weyand, Lin, & Bundle, 2006, Bundle & Weyand, 2012), along with minimized changes in hip height and subsequent

the nature of speed

braking forces. Conceptually the SSC is important for sprinting as it underpins the spring-mass model (SMM). The SMM depicts sprinting as the result of a body mass bouncing along two springs (Blickhan, 1989, Dalleau et al., 1998, Dutton & Smith, 2002, Farley & Gonzalez, 1996). During a complete running cycle, one spring compresses and propels the sprinter’s body forward. Simultaneously, the other spring swings forward in preparation for ground contact. Within an upright sprint, compression of the spring begins at foot strike, which results in horizontal braking forces. This sudden deceleration assists in propelling the swing leg forward in preparation for the following step. As the center of mass moves ahead of the stance foot, the sprinter enters the “midstance” phase. Within the SMM, the spring is compressed to the lowest point, which coincides with a lowered center of mass at mid-stance. Finally, the push-

techniques MAY 2015

off (toe-off) segment of the stance phase describes the return of energy through the extension of the coiled spring. This return of force projects the sprinter forward into the next step. While the SSM provides a conceptual framework for highlighting the actions involved in upright sprinting, recent work suggests that there are limitations to the model’s ability to describe the stance phase of elite sprinters. Specifically, Clark (2014) demonstrates that elite sprinters produce most of their vertical forces in the first half of a ground contact. In comparison, the stance phase of an average sprinter tends to yield a force curve more symmetrical in shape. Therefore, the ability to describe an elite sprinter’s stance phase through the SSM is limited. The SSM can, however, continue to be used as a means of describing the relationship between the SSC, muscle stiffness and sprinting.

3.1 Neuromuscular Structure The production of high vertical forces while sprinting is ultimately dictated by the muscle’s ability to contract. It is well documented that contractile capability is strongly related to muscle fiber crosssectional area (CSA) (Edgerton, Roy, & Gregor, et al., 1986, Gollnick & Bayley, 1986, Hakkinen, 1989, Cormie, McGuigan, &, Newton, 2011). In other words, the greater size of a muscle fiber may associate with a greater ability to produce force. This is evident when comparing type I and II muscle fibers, as type II fibers increase in size to a greater degree than their type I counterparts (Staron et al., 1994). With respect to performance, type II fibers have been shown to display higher force production (Shoepe et al., 2003) and contractile velocity (Faulkner et al., 1982) when compared to type I fibers. These performance characteristics are further directed by sarcomere alignment within a muscle fiber.

kirby lee photo

the nature of speed Figure 2: Building a Speed Reserve Through Investment in Acceleration

A sarcomere is the basic contractile unit that causes a muscle to shorten. Sarcomeres can be organized into “parallel” or “series” arrangement. While parallel sequencing favors force production, series arrangement affords greater shortening velocities. The status of sarcomere order is reflected in muscle pennation angle (PA) and fascicle length (FL). Greater PA is associated with a greater number of sarcomeres in parallel alignment, while longer FL reflects superior series alignment. In addition to a greater number of type II fibers (Costill et al., 1976), sprinters have been shown to possess greater FL (Abe, Kumagai, & Brechue et al., 2000) in comparison to other athletes. While these characteristics provide the high forces required for sprinting, they are ultimately underpinned by the neurological status of the athlete. More specifically, muscle fibers have been show to take on the qualities of their associated motor neuron (Buller, Eccles, & Eccles et al., 1960). Therefore, the characteristics of the neuron innervating a muscle fiber can be considered the primary determinant of a muscle’s contractile capability. Contractile properties are influenced by the speed at which a neuron can transmit an electrical impulse to the muscle. Simply put, the faster a nerve can send a signal to the muscle, the faster and more frequently it can shorten. Neurological adaptations such as increased axon diameter, myelination and dendritic branching can enhance the nerve’s ability to transmit an impulse to the muscle (Gardiner & Heckman, 1985, Gardiner, 1991). This improved transmission provides the athlete a greater capacity to express higher forces over a shorter period of time. As a result, a sprinter may be able to apply higher rates of force dur16

techniques MAY 2015

ing the short ground contact times associated with elite speed.

tinue to improve their chances over longer competitive distances in subsequent periods of training by taking advantage of their newly developed speed reserve. The speed reserve, which is the result of a higher terminal velocity, allows the athlete to preserve sprint mechanics by running long sprints (speed endurance) at a prescribed pace. This training technique also provides benefit as it may prevent the unnecessary exposure to poor sprint mechanics and motoneuron control/ feedback. (See Figure 2)

4.0 Relating the Nature of Speed to Programming

4.1 Breaking down speed through an annual plan

A sprinter’s physiological architecture, though largely shaped by genetics (Vincent et al., 2007), can be enhanced through proper training (Aagaard et al., 2001, Blazevich et al., 2003, Nimphius et al., 2012). This training template should attempt to honor the tenets of periodization with distinct phases dedicated to concentrated loads while also serving to merge the past, present and future through retaining loads. This conjugation and sequencing of fitness phases is done to promote an athlete’s ability to produce, tolerate and sustain the production of high vertical forces within a short period of time. Through an early emphasis on acceleration, a sprinter may improve the biomechanics and propulsive force-generating/ delivering mechanisms (neuromuscular architecture), which then serve to support and bolster their top speed. Once the athlete begins to dedicate training time for the maturity of maximum velocity, they will have benefited from the previous investment in force production, which may allow them to attain: preferred sprinting positions (shoulders stacked on hips, hips stacked on ankles) during the stance phase, optimized hip angles at the terminal portion of the recovery leg, the maintenance of a high hip height, a more proximal foot strike at initiation of stance phase, employment of the SSC and muscle stiffness, higher force production at the onset of stance phase, abbreviated ground contact time. From this point, the athlete can con-

Preparing a sprinter for success in competition requires forethought and deliberate planning. In other words, the coach should create an annual plan using the tenets of periodization as a guide. Recall that periodization is a term that describes the movement from general to specific training aims, where phases are cycled and staged as the workload varies in order to allow for adaptation and competitive readiness. Generally speaking, most coaches build the annual plan by first including the competitions, training camps and possibly travel dates. From here, the phases of training are loosely fleshed out based on the athlete’s level of readiness and trained state, which can be attained through testing, monitoring and interview. Most often, all yearly plans begin with an emphasis on generalized development which serves to provide an athlete dedicated time to revisit and accumulate fitness characteristics that are reduced or compromised during the latter portion of competition and time off. The fitness characteristics that are typically accumulated during a general preparation phase (GPP) include but are not limited to: • Work capacity • Cross sectional area of musculature • Mobility/ flexibility • Strength/ power endurance • Modifications in body composition • Movement technique derivatives (parts of the whole movement) Once the athlete has met the objectives of the GPP, more specialized train-

ing is implemented, typically coinciding with an increase of intensity and taskspecificity. For this article, the Special Preparation Period (SPP) can also be termed the Pre-Competitive Period (PC) as the primary aim is to merge the previous phase of general training with the need for competitive readiness. Training within this time frame continues to finetune the previously listed fitness characteristics through the prescription of retraining loads, but places larger emphasis on practice sessions that impart greater transfer of training effect to the competition schedule (Young, 2006). In general, the following areas are addressed within an SPP/PC: • Maximal strength/ Rate of Force Development • Specialized endurance (specific to the event or sport) • Introductory power development • Whole movement technique Ultimately, this training provides a catalyst for success within the Competition Period (CP). As the name denotes, this phase of training emphasizes practice schedules and exercise selections that

further support and promote optimal readiness for race day. In addition, the volumes of training are generally reduced (in comparison to the entire annual plan) with an increase or maintenance of higher intensities. This is done with the premise that larger workloads may impede performance due to residual or lingering fatigue (McCaulley et al., 2009, Behm et al., 2002). Training tactics within the competitive period typically continue the efforts described within the SPP/PC but prioritize the following: • Strength Speed/ Speed Strength • Rate of Force Development • Perfected movement technique While the aforementioned information regarding phasic development of fitness characteristics is beneficial for most athletes, special attention must be made for the refinement of speed. For this reason, an outline of speed enhancement using a short to long approach is provided below.

4.2 General Preparatory Development of Speed Recall that elite sprinters produce high rates of force within a short stance phase.

This abbreviated ground contact is related to a series of optimal biomechanics that allow for a “quick” toe off from one stance phase that ends with a “higher knee” at the terminal portion of a swing phase. This preferred position within “front side” mechanics allows for a rapid and more direct forceful punch into the ground. Therefore, it can be suggested that swift force production alongside sound running mechanics begets optimal sprinting. Considering this information, a sprinter may respond well to a training program that begins with an emphasis on mastering the acceleration phase. Regardless of status, most sprinters begin the training year following a competitive period punctuated with a taper and a period of complete rest. This dramatic reduction in volume (and fitness) leads to a detrained state. Within sprinting, this detrained state could hypothetically include a reduction in the ability to produce high levels of force, power and movement economy. Acknowledging that maximum velocity is dependent on the ability to produce high rates of force through optimized biomechanics, a reinvestment in acceleration is justified.

MAY 2015 techniques

the nature of speed Figure 3: Theoretical Design of a GPP

a sprint coach may prescribe low-volumes of slightly longer sprints in order to begin the development of speed endurance, which can be defined as a sprinting distance between 60-150m. This secondary aim could serve as a retaining load in order to set-up future training agendas. These agendas could include race-specific “pacing” and the development of a specialized work capacity. (See Figure 3)

4.3 Special Preparation/ Pre-Competition

Figure 4: Theoretical Design of a PC

One method of re-establishing or improving an athlete’s accelerative ability is incline sprinting. Through a subtle slope, a sprinter will be encouraged to produce greater propulsive forces in order to overcome the effects of the inclination, gravity and their body mass (Gottschall & Kram, 2005). This increased force production would come alongside possible improvements in biomechanics, including more aggressive arm action, knee drive and aggressive footsteps. Upon completion of a block of training emphasizing incline sprinting, a coach can begin to reintroduce “flat-ground” sprinting through the prescription of resisted sprints (towing), which mimic the incline. The similarity between incline sprint18

techniques MAY 2015

ing and towing is a continued requirement to produce greater propulsive forces, body lean and aggressive arm and leg action. In addition, lowered starting positions (e.g. push-up starts) can be implemented. These exercises exaggerate the acceleration phase through a drastic reduction in an athlete’s starting hip height. With the hips starting at a lower height, the athlete is placed in a position that not only necessitates high force production and leg drive, but also progressively introduces a longer “footfall”. Gradually increasing the distance the foot travels prior to ground contact organically re-acclimates the athlete to flatground sprinting. In addition to the concentrated loading of acceleration,

Following a training period that emphasizes acceleration, the sprinter is now equipped with the tools necessary to begin top speed development. Since an athlete’s maximum velocity is dependent on their ability to produce and tolerate high rates of force through optimized biomechanics, the performance gains acquired in the GPP will lend support to specialized training aims. Through the prescription of sprint distances that allow the athlete to express a taller posture, the improved force production should lead to a “higher and unwavering” hip position that sits directly under the shoulders and over the ankle at mid-stance. This stacked position provides ample room for the ideal hip flexion and resulting knee height that sets up a strong, vertical leg drive into the track. In addition, this hip and knee position provides the sprinter with clearance to plant the stance leg slightly ahead and underneath the hips. This optimal foot-strike pattern prevents an exaggerated deceleration and provides the sprinter an opportunity to take advantage of the SSC and SMM. In contrast, a weak sprinter will demonstrate higher decelerations immediately upon contact that may coincide with greater amplitude of the hips from step to step. As Dr. Ralph Mann describes, a weaker sprinter will vault into subsequent steps (Mann, 2014). While maximal-effort sprints covering a distance of 40-60 meters allow for this upright running position to occur, sprint coaches have utilized many training tactics to further an athlete’s maximum velocity. Examples of this type of training include fly-in runs and race-modeling efforts. Fly-ins are a type of sprint that provide an athlete with a gradual build-up so that the athlete enters the “sprint” zone in an upright position and at or near their maximum velocity. Theoretically the sub-maximal buildup preserves force-generating ability through a limitation of neuromuscular fatigue. It should also be noted that the coach can control the velocities attained within the flyzone by shortening or extending the build-up. Race modeling is an additional tool used to advance an athlete’s maximum velocity. This type of training refers to a change in effort over a prescribed distance. A coach will create “speed change” zones and define them as “fasteasy-fast” or “fly-float-fly.” Regardless of distance, the athlete is advised to “build speed, accelerate or press” during the “fast or fly” zones. Once the sprinter enters the “easy or float” zone they are cued to “maintain inertia” or continue sprinting with relaxed, flowing form. In the practical

Figure 5: Aligning the Phases of Sprint Development Toward Competition

setting, coaches report that the disinhibition allows the athlete to hit higher velocities as compared to the fast zones when they are volitionally attempting to build speed. While this type of concentrated load is necessary for the continued development of maximum velocity, coaches should use conservative loading strategies and ample recovery within the session and immediately after. The neuromuscular fatigue generated from this type of training is similar to that coming from maximal efforts within competition and in strength-training (Mero & Peltola et al., 1989). In conjunction to the emphasized focus on top speed, retaining loads can be adopted for the continued enhancement and maintenance of acceleration that was prioritized within the previous phase. Furthermore, a second retaining load could be used to highlight speed and special endurance runs that closely mimic longer sprint race distances. Of note, special endurance is a term used to define sprints that require a specific work capacity or pacing strategy. Special endurance runs can be categorized into two classifications based on a sprinter’s specialization (100200m runner or 200-400m runner). Special endurance 1 can be used to describe sprints covering a distance of 150m-300m, while special endurance 2 can describe a sprint ranging a length of 300-600m. Each type of special endurance requires pacing strategies that utilize an athlete’s speed reserve. (See Figure 4)

4.4 Competition Entering into the competitive period, a sprinter adhering to a S2L program would have fully developed their accelerative ability followed by a period of maximum velocity training. Coinciding with these phases would

be a consistent exposure to progressively longer sprints that utilize the athlete’s speed reserve. These strategies aim to culminate in an improved competitive readiness with regard to the stabilization of optimal movement mechanics, force delivery, and work/ sprint capacity. With regard to training, a coach may choose to use retaining loads of acceleration and maximum velocity training to compliment the competition schedule. Care should be given when prescribing higher velocity sprints as the neurological fatigue resulting from this type of training could interfere with race day readiness (Mero & Peltola, 1989). For this reason, the authors of this article suggest letting the races continue to develop & maintain top speed. However, during nonracing weeks, these practices can and should be utilized. Lastly, the coach should attempt to further compliment the competition schedule by designing practice schedules that provide a stimulus that is not occurring frequently enough within the races. For example, if a long sprinter is being asked to race the 200400m often, focusing practices on acceleration or speed endurance may assist in the retention of the speed reserve and force delivery mechanisms. (See Figure 5)

5.0 Conclusion The competitive aim of sprint racing is to outpace other runners. As such, develop training agendas that build an athlete’s sprint ability through logical and evidencebased progressions. Considering that most of the research on sprinting suggests that racing success may be limited by force production, neuromuscular control and resultant biomechanical efficiency, a coach may find a short-to-long (S2L) approach beneficial.

The S2L methodology follows suit with block programming in which concentrated loads are used to bolster the performance of future training blocks. For example, a block of acceleration work may improve the outcomes gained from the next block of training time dedicated to maximum speed development. In addition, retaining loads of reduced volumes are used to maintain the skills and improvements made in previous blocks while also introducing future priorities to ease the transitions from block to block. The adoption of a S2L strategy may also improve an athlete’s speed reserve, which has been demonstrated to play a role in long sprint events (Weyand, Lin, & Bundle, 2006, Bundle & Weyand, 2012). By increasing the rates and length of the acceleration, a higher maximum velocity may be attained. The increased velocity threshold may allow longer sprints to be run at a submaximal percentage that reduces neuromuscular fatigue that may impair an athlete’s ability to quickly produce, delive and tolerate high forces. In conclusion, sprinters of all levels require exposure to practices that consistently afford them opportunities to maximize force production through efficient biomechanics. Furthermore, the coach should allow full recovery during the sessions since metabolic energy availability (conditioning) has not been shown to restrict sprint performance. A S2L approach may allow for the seamless development and refinement of sprint ability that can be used throughout an athlete’s career.

References Aagaard, P., Andersen, J. L., Dyhre-Poulsen, P., Leffers, A. M., Wagner, A., Magnusson, S. P., Halkjaer-Kristensen, J., Simonsen, E. B. (2001). A mechanism for increased contractile strength of MAY 2015 techniques

the nature of speed human pennate muscle in response to strength training: changes in muscle architecture. The Journal of physiology, 534(Pt. 2), 613-623. Abe, T., Kumagai, K., & Brechue, W. F. (2000). Fascicle length of leg muscles is greater in sprinters than distance runners. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 32(6), 1125-1129. Ahmetov II, Druzhevskaya AM, Lyubaeva EV, Popov DV, Vinogradova OL, & Williams AG. (2011). The dependence of preferred competitive racing distance on muscle fiber type composition and ACTN3 genotype in speed skaters. Experimental Physiology. 96(12): 1302-1310. Behm, D. G., Reardon, G., Fitzgerald, J., & Drinkwater, E. (2002). The effect of 5, 10, and 20 repetition maximums on the recovery of voluntary and evoked contractile properties. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 16(2), 209-218. Billat, L. V. (2001). Interval training for performance: a scientific and empirical practice. Special recommendations for middle- and long-distance running. Part I: aerobic interval training. Sports medicine, 31(1), 13-31. Billat, L. V. (2001). Interval training for performance: a scientific and empirical practice. Special recommendations for middle- and long-distance running. Part II: anaerobic interval training. Sports medicine, 31(2), 75-90. Blazevich, A. J., Gill, N. D., Bronks, R., & Newton, R. U. (2003). Training-specific muscle architecture adaptation after 5-wk training in athletes. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 35(12), 2013-2022. Blickhan R. (1989) The spring-mass model for running and hopping. J Biomech 22: 1217-1227. Buller, A. J., Eccles, J. C., & Eccles, R. M. (1960). Interactions between motoneurons and muscles in respect of the characteristic speeds of their responses. The Journal of physiology, 150, 417-439. Bundle MW and Weyand PG. (2012) Sprint exercise performance: does metabolic power matter? Exerc Sport Sci Rev 40: 174-182. Cormie, P., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2011). Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 1--biological basis of maximal power production. Sports medicine, 41(1), 17-38. Costill, D. L., Daniels, J., Evans, W., Fink, W., Krahenbuhl, G., & Saltin, B. (1976). Skeletal muscle enzymes and fiber composition in male and female track athletes. Journal of applied physiology, 40(2), 149-154. Dalleau G, Belli A, Bourdin M, and Lacour JR. (1998). The spring-mass model and the energy cost of treadmill running. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 77: 257-263. DeWeese, B. H., Gray, H. S., Sams, M. L., Scruggs, S. K., Serrano, A. J. (2013). Revising the definition of periodization: merging historical 20

techniques MAY 2015

principles with modern concern. Olympic Coach, 24(1), 5-19. Dutto DJ and Smith GA. (2002) Changes in spring-mass characteristics during treadmill running to exhaustion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 13241331. Edgerton VR, Roy RR, Gregor RJ, et al. (1986). Morphological basis of skeletal muscle power output. In: Jones NL, McCartneyN,McComas AJ, editors. Human muscle power. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, Inc., 43-64. Farley CT and Gonzalez O. (1996). Leg stiffness and stride frequency in human running. J Biomech 29: 181186. Faulkner, J. A., Claflin, D. R.,

McCully, K. K., & Jones, D. A. (1982). Contractile properties of bundles of fiber segments from skeletal muscles. The American journal of physiology, 243(1), C66-73. Forbes, S. C., Slade, J. M., & Meyer, R. A. (2008). Short-term high-intensity interval training improves phosphocreatine recovery kinetics following moderate-intensity exercise in humans. Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism, 33(6), 11241131. Francis, C. (1992). The Charlie Francis Training System. TBLI Publications. Gardiner, D. Y., & Heckman, C. J. (1985). Effects of exercise training on kirby lee photo

the nature of speed alpha-motorneurons. Journal of applied physiology, 101(4), 1228-1236. Gardiner, P. F. (1991). Effects of exercise training on components of the motor unit. Canadian journal of sport sciences, 16(4), 271-288. Gineviciene V, Pranculis A, Jakaitiene A, Milasius K, & Kucinskas V. (2011). Genetic variation of the human ACE and ACTN3 genes and their association with functional muscle properties of Lithuanian elite athletes. Medicina, 47(5): 284-290. Gollnick PD, Bayley WM. (1986). Biochemical training adaptations and maximal power. In: Jones NL, McCartney N, McComas AJ, editors. Human muscle power. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics, 255-6. Gottschall, J. S., & Kram, R. (2005). Ground reaction forces during downhill and uphill running. Journal of biomechanics, 38(3), 445-452. Hunter, J. P., Marshall, R. N., & McNair, P. J. (2005). Relationships between ground reaction force impulse and kinematics of sprint-running acceleration. Journal of applied biomechanics, 21(1), 31-43. Issurin, V. (2008). Block periodization versus traditional training theory: a review. The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness, 48(1), 65-75. Komi, P. V. (2008). The stretch-shortening cycle. In: Komi, P. V., editor. Strength and Power in Sport. London: Blackwell Science Ltd, 1992: 169-79. Mann, R. V. (2014, November). Analysis of sprint mechanics, start mechanics, & maximum velocity. Presented at the 2014 University of South Carolina Speed Elite Coaches Clinic, Columbia, SC. Mann, R. V. (2013). The mechanics of sprinting and hurdling. Charlestown, SC. McCaulley, G. O., McBride, J. M., Cormie, P., Hudson, M.B, Nuzzo, J. L., Quindry, J. C., Triplett, T. N. (2009). Acute hormonal and neuromuscular responses to hypertrophy, strength and power type resistance exercise. European Journal of Applied Physiology.105(5):695-70. McMahon, S., & Wegner, H. A. (1998). The relationship between aerobic fitness and both power output and subsequent recovery during maximal intermittent exercise. J Sci Med Sport, 1(4), 219-227. Mero, A., & Peltola, E. (1989). Neural activation fatigued and non-fatigued conditions of short and long sprint running. Biol Sport, 6(1), 43-59. Niemi AK, & Majamaa K. (2005). 22

techniques MAY 2015

Mitochondrial DNA and ACTN3 genotypes in Finnish elite endurance and sprint athletes. European Journal of Human Genetics. 13: 965-969. Nimphius, S., McGuigan, M. R., & Newton, R. U. (2012). Changes in muscle architecture and performance during a competitive season in female softball players. Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 26(10), 26552666. Scott RA, Irving R, Irwin L, Morrison E, Charlton V, Austin K, Tladi D, Deason M, Headley SA, Kolkhorst FW, Yang N, North K, & Pitsiladis YP. (2010). ACTN3 and ACE genotypes in elite Jamaican and US sprinters. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 42(1): 107-112. Staron, R. S., Karapondo, D. L., Kraemer, W. J., Fry, A. C., Gordon, S. E., Falkel, J. E., Hagerman, F. C., Hikida, R. S. (1994). Skeletal muscle adaptations during early phase of heavy-resistance training in men and women. Journal of applied physiology, 76(3), 1247-1255. Stone MH, Sanborn K, O’Bryant HS, Hartman M, Stone ME, Proulx C, Ward B, and Hruby J. (2003). Maximum strengthpower-performance relationships in collegiate throwers. J Strength Cond Res 17: 739-745. Vincent B, De Bock K, Ramaekers M, Van den Eede E, Van Leemputte M, Hespel P, and Thomis MA. (2007). ACTN3 (R577X) genotype is associated with fiber type distribution. Physiol Genomics 32: 58-63. Weston, A. R., Wilson, G. R., Noakes, T. D., & Myburgh, K. H. (1996). Skeletal muscle buffering capacity is higher in the superficial vastus than in the soleus of spontaneously running rats. Acta physiologica Scandinavica, 157(2), 211-216. Weyand PG, Sternlight DB, Bellizzi MJ, and Wright S. (2000). Faster top running speeds are achieved with greater ground forces not more rapid leg movements. J Appl Physiol 89: 1991-1999. Weyand, P. and M. Bundle. (2005). Energetics of high-speed running: integrating classical theory and contemporary observations. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 288: R956-R965. Weyand, P. G., Lin, J. E., & Bundle, M. W. (2006). Sprint performance-duration relationships are set by the fractional duration of external force application. American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integra-

tive and comparative physiology, 290(3), R758-765. Weyand PG, Sandell RF, Prime DN, and Bundle MW. (2010). The biological limits to running speed are imposed from the ground up. J Appl Physiol 108: 950-961. Young, W. B. (2006). Transfer of strength and power training to sports performance. International journal of sports physiology and performance, 1(2), 74-83.

Bios: Brad H. DeWeese EdD: Dr. DeWeese currently serves as a speed & strength coach at the ETSU Olympic Training Site that supports USA Bobsled & Skeleton, USA Canoe/ Kayak, and USA Weightlifting. Previous to this position, he was the Head of Sport Physiology for the USOC’s Winter Division based out of Lake Placid, NY. DeWeese has coached Team USA athletes to over 110 medals within International competition, including the Olympic games, in addition to seven World Champions in various speed/ power sporting events. Joel H. Williams: Joel is assistant track and field coach at UNC Asheville where he supervises the sprints & running events (up to 1500m), hurdles, throws and high jump. Coach Williams has produced numerous Big South All-Conference and NCAA Regional qualification performances during his eight-year tenure in Asheville, along with the school’s first AllAmerican student-athlete. Chris Bellon, MS: Chris Bellon is a PhD student within the ETSU program of Sport Physiology and Performance, where he also serves as an associate strength & conditioning coach for the men’s and women’s varsity track and field teams. Prior to his arrival at ETSU coach Bellon worked as a Sports Performance Coach at Velocity Sports Performance in Mahwah, New Jersey. Matt. L. Sams, MA: Matt Sams is a PhD student within the ETSU program of Sport Physiology and performance, where he also serves as a sport scientist and strength coach for the men’s varsity soccer team. Prior to his PhD studies, Matt served as a volunteer assistant for Dr. DeWeese at the USOC Olympic Training Center in Lake Placid, New York.

Discus Throw

MIKE CORN photo 24

techniques MAY 2015

Essentials Mechanics for the Practitioner and the Thrower Dr. Andreas Maheras

he mechanics of discus throwing is not yet fully understood. Based on the information available to date however, some mechanical elements present the most salient technical points in the course of a discus throw. The points presented here do not represent all technical issues encountered in discus throwing but they do constitute the frame upon which a sound technical pattern should be developed and they do make up the essential elements that a practitioner should have in mind and upon which the throwing execution should be judged as effective and efficient or not. In this direction, it is important not to lose sight of what really matters in discus throwing, at least from a mechanical point of view, and what the practitioner and the thrower are really after during a proper execution of the throw.

Brief Overview of Speed Generation in Discus Throwing During the throw the feet exert forces on the ground and the ground react equally and opposite on the feet. Those forces generate linear momentum in the early stages of the throw as the system translates horizontally across the circle (see figure 1). During the delivery, the thrower loses some of that momentum and obtains vertical linear momentum. The result of the forward and upward linear momentum is a contribution to the speed of the discus at release. However, most of the

discus speed is due to momentum contributions relative to the center of mass the thrower + discus system. This is where the angular momentum of the thrower, the discus and the combined, thrower+discus, angular momentum come into play. There is angular momentum in two different directions. First, around the vertical axis, which is responsible for imparting horizontal velocity to the discus (see figure 2) and, second around the horizontal axis, which is responsible for imparting vertical velocity to the discus. On average, the forward linear momentum of the system accounts for approximately 6 percent of the horizontal speed of the discus at release with the remaining 94 percent contributed by the angular momentum around the vertical axis. Similarly, the upward linear momentum accounts for approximately 10 percent of the vertical speed of the discus at release, with the remaining 90 percent contributed by the angular momentum around the horizontal axis. Therefore, most of the speed of the discus is due to angular momentum not linear momentum. Rotary momentum around the vertical axis generates horizontal speed which is transmitted to the discus at release. Angular momentum around the horizontal axis generates vertical speed which is transmitted to the discus during the second half of the delivery phase. Very little of either of those two momentums is obtained from the ground during the time of release. For the most part, they are

Figure 1: Angular momentum about the vertical axis (view from top)

Figure 2: Foward linear momentum in the early stages of the throw

MAY 2015 techniques

Discus Throw essentials

b) far from the middle of the body and, c) over the longest range possible (see Maheras 2011, for further details).

obtained from the ground during the earlier phases of the throw. That is, the momentum around the vertical axis is generated during the first double support and single support phases and, the momentum around the horizontal axis is generated during the second half of the single support phase on the right foot and the first half of the delivery phase. The angular momentum is stored in the body of the thrower where it expresses itself as a rotation of the body, before being imparted to the discus during the end of the throw. For that reason, the major emphasis should always been given to the rotary aspects of the throw, but without ignoring the linear aspects of it (for more details regarding momentum generation in discus throwing, see Maheras 2008).

Back of the Circle 1. The Shifting of the System’s Center of Mass Toward the Left Foot. Theoretically, the thrower should shift the center of mass to a position that is almost directly over the left foot and then push directly backwards on the ground to obtain a good drive directly forward across the circle which means that the system should have a good amount of horizontal speed at the time the left foot loses contact with the ground. This is essential because

techniques MAY 2015

this linear horizontal speed will be partially converted to vertical during the delivery phase which will then contribute to the final speed of the discus. If the thrower fails to bring the center of mass close enough to the vertical of the left foot, the thrower should make a strong horizontal drive across the circle in an oblique direction and not directly backwards. This will maintain a good amount of linear horizontal velocity for the system. In this case, pushing directly backwards, will reduce the amount of force the left foot can exert on the ground and consequently it will reduce the horizontal velocity (also see Maheras 2012, for a detailed explanation). 2. The Swinging Action of the Right Leg. After the right foot takes off from the ground in the back of the circle, the right leg should make a wide counterclockwise rotation around the body and then it should be thrust aggressively toward the middle of the circle. This action facilitates the generation of angular momentum around the vertical axis exactly because it aids the left foot to exert forces on the ground which are necessary for the generation of that momentum. The three criteria for the action of the right leg are that it should be thrust under control but a) fast,

3. The Swinging Action of the Left Arm. Theoretically and ideally, the action of the left arm in the back of the circle is similar to the function of the right leg. Starting with the moment the discus is at its furthermost point at the end of the winds and until the take off of the left foot, the left arm should make a wide counterclockwise rotation around the body. The left arm should be “thrown” in a controlled manner at high speed, away from the middle of the body and over the longest range possible. The aim again is to facilitate the generation of rotary momentum around the vertical axis. If thrusting the left arm aggressively in the back of the circle causes problems in the course of the throw, then its action may have to be curtailed. However, it should be noted that the left arm contributes approximately one third more than the action of the right leg to the rotation of the system. Therefore, the wise practitioner and athlete should make every effort to take advantage of what the left arm has to offer. It is the combined action of the right leg and the left arm that will determine the total amount of rotary momentum of the system (see Maheras 2011, for more).

Middle of the Circle 1. Recovery of the Legs. After the left foot loses contact with the ground, the legs can no longer participate in the generation of rotary momentum. Their task at this point is to increase their own speeds of rotation relative to the rest of the body. This will allow for an earlier planting of the left foot and it will also allow the thrower to arrive at a “wound up” position where the lower parts are rotated significantly ahead of the upper parts and the discus itself. During this airborne phase the thrower should decrease the distance between the center of mass of each leg and the longitudinal axis of the system. This axis passes through the system center of mass and points from the lower part to the upper part of the system. If the system tilts, this axis tilts also.

Andreas Maheras photo

Discus Throw essentials One way to achieve a faster rotation of the legs while airborne is to bring them closer to the axis of rotation (see Maheras 2011, for more). 2. Recovery of the Left Arm. After the left foot take off in the back of the circle, the left arm also becomes unable to contribute to the creation of any angular momentum for the system because there is no contact with the ground. The left arm in this instance should reduce its rate of rotation and decrease its radius of motion. This action of the left arm allows it to transfer part of its own momentum to the rest of the system (legs) where it is needed most (see Maheras 2011, for more). 3. Torsion Angles. The achievement of certain torsion angles, just before the final pulling effort, is of paramount importance in the course of discus throwing. There are six different angles that are formed during the second double support (see Maheras 2014, for more). The angle between the right arm and the right foot at the moment of the single support over the latter is the largest of all and it expresses a well wound up position, which is good, since the ensuing unwinding will help the thrower to transfer angular momentum from the body to the discus. The torsion of the shoulders relative to the hips is also a criterion for an adequate wound up position. Depending on anatomical and also mid section and right arm flexibility factors, a thrower can exhibit less than optimum values in a particular torsion angle but compensate with optimum values in another, thus maintaining a satisfactory overall wound up position.

Delivery 1. Second Swinging Action of the Left Arm. After the right foot lands in the middle of the circle, the thrower swings the left arm very dynamically counterclockwise and away from the middle of the body which during the second double support (delivery) has a backward tilt. This action facilitates the generation of angular momentum for the system because it helps the right foot to apply forces on the ground necessary for generating the rotary momentum. During the delivery double 28

techniques MAY 2015

support it helps both feet to do the same. Because of the backward tilt, the swinging action of the left arm helps generate a combination of angular momentum about both the vertical and the horizontal axis which is what the thrower is after at this particular point (see Maheras 2011, for more). 2. Second Recovery of the Left Arm. The swinging action of the left arm described above helps the system generate additional momentum which is beneficial. Much of this momentum, however, is initially stored in the left arm itself and unless it is transferred to the discus it will not do the thrower any good. To successfully transfer the momentum from the left arm to the discus, the thrower needs to reduce the angular momentum of the left arm during the delivery. This can be achieved by slowing down the armâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s motion or reducing the radius of its motion or both (see Maheras 2011, for more). 3. Downward Forces Against the Ground. There is a relationship between the loss of horizontal speed and the gain of vertical speed of the systemâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s center of mass during the delivery phase. What is observed is a loss of horizontal speed and a gain in vertical speed. The larger the loss of horizontal speed during the delivery, the larger the vertical speed of the system at release. Ideally the system should have a large amount of horizontal velocity at the moment of the left foot contact, which itself is planted aggressively on the ground. If those two conditions exist, then the system will lose some of its horizontal velocity but it will still have enough to contribute to the horizontal velocity of the discus, while at the same time there will be a gain in vertical velocity. This way the left foot is the catalyst for the optimum conversion of horizontal velocity to vertical velocity (see Maheras 2009, for more). 4. Divergence Angle. The divergence angle expresses the difference between the horizontal direction of motion of the center of mass and the horizontal direction of motion of the discus at release. Generally, the motion of the center of mass during the last quarter turn is in a diagonal direction forward

and toward the left. The horizontal direction of motion of the discus after release points forward and slightly to the right. The size of the divergence angle determines how much of the horizontal speed of the system during the last quarter turn effectively contributes to the horizontal speed of the discus. The larger the divergence angle the greater the loss in the contribution of the horizontal speed of the system to the horizontal speed of the discus and the distance thrown. Values of over 20 degrees result in considerable loses in distance thrown with a 50 degree angle resulting in a 1.4 to 2.1 meters loss. On the other hand a 10 degree value will result in a loss of only 0.1 meter. In practice, the correct drive of the center of mass across the circle and the correct placement of the left foot in the front of the circle will affect the magnitude of that angle (also see Maheras, 2012).

Technical Points and Suggestions Shift the system center of mass towards the left foot to a point almost directly over it and push directly backwards to obtain a good amount of linear horizontal speed to contribute to the horizontal speed of the discus at release. If shifting directly over the left is not feasible, then push diagonally, not directly backwards, to ensure horizontal velocity generation. Ensure that during the landing on the right of the foot in the middle of the circle there is no significant deceleration and that a good amount of horizontal speed remains in the system during the left foot landing in the front of the circle. Pushing directly backwards which implies a straight forward direction of the center of mass, will also help the thrower keep the divergence angle at a minimum and the contribution of the horizontal velocity to the maximum. Develop a large amount of rotary momentum around the vertical axis in the back of the circle, after adequately rotating the shoulders clockwise, by swinging both the right leg and the left arm in a dynamic, rotational fashion and, under control. This is the only significant chance the thrower has to generate momentum around the vertical axis. Close to 90 percent of the eventual total momentum is developed in the back of the circle during the first

Discus Throw essentials double and single supports. Weak swinging actions of the limbs in the back of the circle will result in inadequate rotary momentum generation. Keep the left arm at shoulder level and allow it to participate in the generation of that momentum. Although a thrower can partially make up for lost momentum during the delivery phase, one cannot fully compensate for lost ground in the back of the circle. Allow both the right and left leg and left arm to recover and “wrap” close to the axis of rotation during the turn in the middle of the circle. This will enable the system to efficiently store the previously acquired momentum, for later use. Achieve a well would-up position during the single support over the right foot. This will subsequently allow the thrower to transfer the angular momentum from the body to the discus. Exert a large downward force against the ground during the double support delivery phase to ensure a vertical reaction and the subsequent acquisition of a good amount of vertical speed to contribute to the vertical speed of the discus. Ensure a good swinging and a good recovery (block) of the left arm during the delivery of the discus.

A Fundamental Technical Evaluation of a Throw The example that follows shows how an evaluation of a discus throwing technique may read. It assumes that individual analysis data for the athlete are available, and it shows what the main technical issues under examination may be. • The horizontal translation of the system center of mass was (directly forward, or oblique). The contribution of the horizontal speed of the system to the horizontal speed of the discus was (average, or larger or smaller than average). • The contribution of the vertical speed of the system to the vertical speed of the discus was (large, average, etc.). • The combined swinging actions of the right leg and left arm in the back of the circle were (good, average etc.). • The amount of angular momentum around the vertical axis generated in the back of the circle was (small, large, etc.). This was followed by a (large, small/ increase, decrease) of that momentum in the front of the circle.

techniques MAY 2015

• The thrower kept the legs (tight, far apart) while airborne after the take off in the back of the circle. • The thrower gave a (large, small, average) amount of horizontal speed to the discus. • The recovery action of the left arm was (good, average, very good). • The second swing of the left arm was (good, average, etc), and it did (or did not) slow down enough before release. • During the single support on the right foot and the double support delivery the thrower acquired a (good, moderate, etc.) amount of angular momentum around the horizontal axis. • The thrower was (or was not) able to transfer it to the discus which made the vertical speed of the discus (large, small, etc.). • The thrower was (or was not) able to transfer rotary momentum, around the vertical axis, to the discus. • The thrower achieved a (good, moderate etc.) wound-up position in the single support on the right foot, while (large, small etc.) angles were observed in the (specific torsion angles). • The ensuing unwinding (did or did not) help the thrower transfer the angular momentum, around the vertical axis, to the discus. • The divergence angle between the directions of motion of the system and of the discus was (or was not) large. Therefore the contribution of the horizontal speed of the system to the horizontal speed of the discus was (good, average, etc.). The technical items mentioned here, as a whole, will dramatically influence the amount of speed that can be imparted to the discus at release. The practitioner and the athlete should be aware of them and make them the framework of the throwing action according to the guidelines given above.

Author’s Note Decrease of the Radius of the Discus. This is a technical/mechanical element that was proposed by Dapena & Anderst (1997) based on analysis observations of an elite thrower. It could theoretically be introduced to those throwers who can implement it successfully at release. For a given amount of rotary momentum of the

discus around the vertical axis, the shorter the distance between the system center of mass and the extension of the line of travel of the discus, the higher the horizontal speed of the discus. By tilting the body toward the left near the instant of release the thrower can shorten the distance between the center of mass and the discus and this way increase the horizontal speed of the discus. It is understood that throwers are usually advised to maintain the longest radius for the entire throw and, rightly so for many of them. For skillful throwers, this advice may need to be modified, so that the radius of the discus is maintained as large as possible during the majority of the duration of the throw with a brief shortening of it, immediately before the discus release, simply because this action will increase the speed of the discus. The important technical point here is to shorten the radius close to the release moment only and not sooner. An experienced practitioner should judge the skill level of the thrower and implement this technique point accordingly but not go out of her way to instruct the thrower to do such a thing.

References Dapena, J., & Anderst, W. (1997). Discus Throw (Men). Scientific Services Project, U.S.A Track & Field. Biomechanics Laboratory, Dept. of Kinesiology, Indiana University. Maheras, A. (2014). Torsion Angles in Discus Throwing. Techniques for Track and Field & Cross Country, 8 (2), 39-42. Maheras, A. (2012). The Horizontal Translation in Discus Throwing. Techniques for Track and Field & Cross Country, 5 (4), 33-36. Maheras, A. (2011). The Function of the Extremities in Discus Throwing. Techniques for Track and Field & Cross Country, 4 (4), 8-16. Maheras, A. (2008). Momentum Development in Discus Throwing. NTCA Throwers Handbook, J.A. Peterson & Lasorsa R. editors, p.p. 132-136.

BIO: Dr. Andreas Maheras is the throws coach at Fort Hays State University in Kansas and is a frequent contributor to techniques.

MAY 2015 techniques

techniques MAY 2015

kirby lee photo

Triple Jump Practice Parameters Four practice parameters in successful triple jump for beginners, advanced and professional track and field athletes Iliyan Chamov

he triple jump is a complex biomechanical act that can be divided into four different stages: acceleration, take off, flight phase and landing. Running during the acceleration phase represents biomechanical motions of rhythmic character, based on the running steps before the board. After acceleration, the triple jump has arrhythmic characteristics presented as three take offs and three flight phases, terminologically separated to hop, step and jump phases (Miladinov, 2004). The triple jump male event has been included in the modern Olympic Games since 1886; and female triple jump since 1996. Triple jump has been considered by many coaches in the past as a high injury rate predisposing event. In order to overcome this myth, many coaches seem to be concentrating on the strength preparation of the athlete for the event without balancing other important factors like: technique, speed, power and agility. For the purpose of this study, the

review of literature was divided into four parts. The first and second studies describe the importance of the speed during the triple jump as well as an overview of lower extremity strength output tests. The third research examines the benefits of single leg multiple jumps, otherwise referred as (plyometric) exercise training. Finally, the fourth, researchers have examined the effect of single arm motion versus double arm motion as well at kinetic motions during the triple jump event.

Review of Literature: Speed According to NCAA, IAAF and Olympic track and field rules, the distance in the triple jump is measured from the takeoff board to the closest mark left by the athlete in the sand. So achieving maximal distance in the horizontal plane is the ultimate goal in the triple jump. The following research shows evidence that preserving the horizontal speed during the phases is of crucial importance.

The purpose of the triple jump event is to achieve the longest distance while combining the hop, step and jump phases. The length of the jump depends mostly on the athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to generate horizontal speed developed during the acceleration phase (approach), and to maintain this speed during the three phases of the triple jump (Perttunen et al., 2000). According to the research collected during the World Championship in Berlin, Germany (2009) there was no evidence indicating that an athlete maintained the same speed generated in the approach during the hop, step and jump. In addition, Hommel demonstrated that the most successful outcomes were achieved with higher horizontal velocity (Hommel, 2009). World class triple jumpers must be able to reach speeds of faster than 10 meters per second (m/s) before the takeoff board and maintain, or develop this speed during the jump (Hommel et al., 2009). The triple jump athlete must be MAY 2015 techniques

TRIPLE JUMP PRACTICE PARAMETERS

able to resist personal body weight gravitational pull and maintain the horizontal velocity of the body mass in forward motion, with minimum or no loss in the developed velocity. This can be achieved with increased reaction time performed by the muscles, and increased production of force in the horizontal direction (Perttunen et al., 2000). Portnoy (2008) investigated the current world record holder Jonathan Edwards from England, who jumped 18.29 meters (60’0.25”) in (1995). Edwards achieved the fastest ever recorded horizontal velocity,11.90 m/s, during the last 5 meters before the take-off board in his world record jump. Even more, the research demonstrated that he developed a 2.10 m/s faster speed before the take-off board respectively to the previous part of the approach, suggesting evidence of aggressive acceleration. More specifically, his speed in the final 10 meters increased from10.35 m/s to 10.85 m/s (Portnoy,2008). Vitold Kreyer, the coach of the world record holder for women triple jumpers, reported the data of his experiment, “The Development of Triple Jump for Females”. The research describes that one of the most important factors in the triple jump is speed. He describes the speed as a specific motion and translation of the body in a short period of time. Speed is a prerequisite for achieving the greatest distance, even though maintaining the highest velocity possible over the take-off board will decrease the biomechanical loadings. Overall this increase in speed has been shown to increase triple jump result. (Golubtzov, 1988) 36

techniques MAY 2015

In 2009, Hommel presented supporting evidence of how the short sprint played an important role in “Scientific Research Project Biomechanical Analyses” conducted during the world championship in Berlin. The data demonstrated how the top 12 triple jumpers’ horizontal velocity increased in the last 5 meters prior to the take-off board and how horizontal velocity progressively decreased during the three jumping phases. The research also demonstrated a positive correlation between the horizontal velocity during the triple jump phases and the final result. This might be explained with another correlation, not only must the center of gravity resist the speed lost, but also other parts of the body, including the foot. Lower horizontal velocity in the all phases of the jump leads to prolonged ground contact and decrease of the distance. Therefore from this research it might be recommended that training practice, or drills, at the same speed and intensity as the triple jump, should be implemented in the preparation program. However, this is not possible during all preparatory cycles, so exercises have to be progressively increased and simultaneously adapt biomechanically to the triple jump loading characteristics. Early in the season it is beneficial for the athlete to perform jumping exercises from a short approach (three to five running steps), and increasing the distance of the approach (seven to 14 running steps) with the progression of the season. Exercises with slower speed intensity require generation of increased momentum which lowers the center of mass, therefore decreasing the velocity and the distance.

(Lauder and Payton,1995) Inessa Kravets, the World record holder (female), used 14 running steps during the approach for her acceleration before the board, leading to a velocity of 8.94 m/s in the last 11.6m. before the board. The last 6.1 m. before the board, the velocity was 9.14 m/s; the difference between these two sections is an increase of 2.5 percent, an indication of an aggressive and powerful triple jump. (Kreyer,1992) Kravets’ coach, Vitold Kreyer has suggested that a 40 m sprint from the start is one of the most important predictors. If a female’s goal is to jump over 14.00m she would need to run 40 m in 5.0 seconds (sec.) or faster (Kreyer, 1992). The national triple jump coach of Germany, Eckhart Hutt, presented “New Studies in Athletics” a table with different triple jumpers’ speed before the take-off board. The speed is measured during the last 6 meters before the board. (see Table 1) The rationale behind this is that the athlete will not be able to maintain speed if he or she doesn’t develop it first. This is why the short sprint is an essential part of the triple jump’s training program. Not only the amount of sprints over short distances with maximal velocity are necessary to develop the speed before the board, but jumping exercises such as multiple jumps should be included with high intensity strength training. (Golubtzov,1988).

Strength Research involving seven professional triple jumpers demonstrated that triple jumpers have to be able to support more than 15 times their body weight during the jump phases (Perttunen et al, 2000). With this the 2010 World and European champion, Phillips Idowu, suggested that athletes should be able to support 12 times their own body weight and resist the biomechanical loadings during each phase connection of the triple jump. He also stated if the athletes’ strength and conditioning is not developed well, the outcome of the jump might decrease, and possibly increased injuries as a result. Idowu’s strength program is based on explosive character exercises such as half

squat jumps, cleans and half squat single leg. As a result, he has improved his jump performance (Idowu, 2010). Pertunen et. al (2000) found that the greatest amount of pressure as a result of the ground contact in the triple jump are experienced over the heel and forefoot. This research involved placing 16 pressure sensors over the planter foot on seven jumpers, then asking them to perform six triple jumps. The data accumulated with each jump showed that the pressure is most often detected on the lateral side of the forefoot and the heel. Therefore the research concluded that the gastrocnemius muscle, the vastus lateralis and hip extensors have a controlling role in the prevention of yielding in athlete’s center of the mass. The same study also described how the gluteus maximus is directly related to the ability of the athlete to maintain ground contact without yielding occurring. If yielding occurs in the hip joint during the triple jump phases, the reason may be weak hip extensors. Also, the knee and ankle biomechanical kinetic chain motions are respectively slow and inadequate to the triple jump motion (Pertunen,2000 ). The back squat exercise is a very

closely related to the triple jump according to the Perttunen’s research. The pressure over the foot and the muscle groups involved in the squat, make this exercise very effective with its similarity in biomechanical loading in relation to the triple jump (Perttunen, 2000). A decrease in horizontal velocity before and during the jump is the reason for prolonged ground contact in each phase, causing yielding in the center of the mass (Knoedel, 1984) The triple jump requires strength that is beneficial for the ground contact reaction. The research”Differences in some triple jump rhythmic paramethers” demonstrates how the short duration of ground contact during the connection is better for the final result. The same research explaining how Johnathan Edwards decreased his ground contact of 0.38 sec. to 0.34 sec. resulting in the current world record. Research continues further with significant results observed in Conley, the second best jumper during that period. His ground contact decreased from 0.43 to 0.40 sec. respectively, with his result increasing from 17.45 m. to 17.86 m. (Portnoy,2008). Both of these world level athletes demonstrated a shortened ground contact support

phase resulting in a better overall triple jump. The prolonged time in the support phase is a result of weak hip and knee extensors. Therefore it is strongly related to strength and conditioning (Perttunen et. al.,2000) Jonathan Edwards’ coach, Carl Johnson, published (1996) some of Edwards’ practices after he set the new world record. In his publication, he states that in the year of the world record Edwards worked mostly on horizontal speed, lower take off angle, and getting stronger. ”Jonathan Edwards’ Program” by Scott Weiser presents how Edwards maintains that strength during the competition season. The main exercises used in his preparation and maintaining periods are squat, clean and bench press (Weiser,2002). According to Coach Johnson released Edwards’ practices, his strength results increased dramatically before 1995 (the year of the world record). He increased his clean from 122.5 kg to 132.5 kg just a year before the world record and his half squat to 235kg. Weight lifting practices have been executed three times a week in his practice schedule (Beil,2001).

TRIPLE JUMP PRACTICE PARAMETERS Table 2

Single leg multiple jumps (plyometrics) Single leg multiple jumps is a form of plyometric exercises. The National Strength and Conditioning Association (2008), separates plyometrics in to two different phases: mechanical and neurophysiological. The mechanical part of the plyometrics phase is focused on increasing elastic energy. The usefulness of the energy is based on the speed of concentric muscle motion created by the total force (NSCA, 2008). The second phase, neurophysiological, is under muscle spindle regulation. This mechanism is also known as the stretch reflex. The muscle spindles are sensitive to the amount and degree of the stretch. Therefore, once activated, these spindles force the muscle to contract rapidly to increase the force production (NSCA, 2008). Without rapid eccentric motion after the concentric, or a prolonged concentric phase, elastic energy is wasted and lost as heat. Therefore, the stretch reflex cannot be used (Beachle and Earle,2008, p.414415). Implementing plyometric type exercises in the practice program increases strength and maintains movement speed (Kutz, 2003). According to Willson et. al. (2008) the main purpose of plyometric drills is to imitate and substitute triple jump loadings during practice. Dynamic drills are more similar to the triple jump and are more effective than static drills. The plyometric training drills should be practiced at the same or similar speed to the triple jump event (Lauder and Payton,1995). Yo and Andrews (1998) state that the support leg during the phases in the triple jump is important for the success in the

event. Moreover, the swing leg has also been defined as important because of the center of mass velocity to changes in balance. Dick (2002) explained how important it is for the athlete to perform the practice exercises with the same physical resistance as the desired skills. Therefore, dynamic plyometric drills are used to replace the movement pattern used in the triple jump. Dynamic plyometrics are effective enough to replace the triple jump from the full approach (Wilson et. al.,2008)

Technique It has been stated by Miladinov (2004) that most of the professional female triple jumpers perform with a single arm motion technique that sets up specific coordination characteristics for athletes. Triple jump practice drills performed with more velocity (dynamic) develop the athlete’s coordination more than triple jump exercises performed from the standing (static) position. A decrease in the biomechanical execution of the triple jump can be caused by a decrease of horizontal velocity during the take-off phases, an increase of ground contact reaction time during “Hop” and “step” phase, or increased height of the jump. A recommended breakdown of the entire triple jump result is: Hop: 35-36 percent, Step: 30-31 percent, Jump: 33-35 percent (Fukashiro et al.,1981; Fukashiro and Miyashita,1983; Yu and Hay,1996). Another qualitative technique pattern is knee and hip angle during the take-off phase, which can cause an increase in the jump angle. (Pertunnen et al.,2000; Yu and Hay,1995). According to Ashby and Heegaard

(2002), athletes performing the jump phase with free upper body limb motion (single arm motion) are jumping 21.2 percent farther than those without arm motion. Also, subjects with free limb motion increased take-off velocity at their center of gravity by 12.7 percent. Therefore, it seems from the data collected that free arm motion during the jump may be adding more balance and control. Todd (1999) found that correct arm motion delivers a power output and horizontal velocity during the approach, resulting in an overall increased triple jump distance. Swinging motion reduces actions against the body and increases the body’s momentum. Increased body momentum leads to horizontal body translation in the space. Once the body is in the air, the arms can maintain balance during the flight and set up the body in proper position for the next ground contact (Golubtzov,1988). An analyzes conducted by Kreyer (1992) of triple jump world record holder for women concluded that the athlete using single arm motion has more balanced in the air and prolonged flying time during the “Step.” Single arm motion assists the athlete in maintaining proper knee and hip joint angles during the jump. Moreover, the single arm motion is increasing the swing leg momentum in the beginning of each phase, which leads to explosiveness and consistent velocity through the jump. During the world championship in Berlin, Hommel (2009) investigated the top 12 triple jump male athletes. The best jumper in the research used double arm motion and presented a loss in horizontal velocity of Hop: 0.81m/s, Step: 1.24m/s, Jump: 1.48m/s, and ground contact time of Hop: 0.13sec., Step: 0.16sec., Jump: 0.17sec. A second athlete who placed sixth during the championship used single arm motion, and as a result experienced minimal loss of horizontal velocity of Hop: 0.81m/s, Step: 1.02m/s, Jump: 1.22m/s, and ground contact time of Hop: 0.11sec., Step: 0.14sec., Jump: 0.14sec. The data represents that single arm motion is more beneficial to maintain short duration ground contact.

Methodology The purpose of this study was to investigate the combined effect of four main triple jump practice parameters among

TRIPLE JUMP PRACTICE PARAMETERS Figure 1

eters, or the official triple jump result will not be taken under consideration. The study investigates triple jump related practice events of experienced jumper. Events include 40 meters sprint, back squat, quintuple jump single leg and performance technique. Data will be collected using, metric tape, stop watch, 20 kg squat bar with weight plates in kg and video camera (Sony) connected to computer software (Kinovea-0.8.15)

Procedure

male and female track and field athletes. The researcher developed a series of exercises identified through the review of literature. The study used 40 m sprint, back squat, quintuple jump single leg and technique implementations to investigate triple jump progression through the season. Significant factors measured in the study included back squat measured in kilograms, 40 meters sprint measured in seconds, and single leg quintuple jump measured in meters.

Participants The participant is a 25 year old female, height 1.72m (appx 5’8”) and 62kg (137 lbs) body weight. The subject is a triple jump qualifier for French Olympic trials. The participant has seven years of experience with the triple jump event.

Study Design The study follows experimental correlation design with one group. The test will be conducted throughout the duration of the season. The type of practices, intensity, frequency and methods prescribed during the season are not the topic of investigation in the study. However the four parameters under investigation examine the variables correlating to the triple jump best performance throughout the season. The participant will perform 40m sprints during practices throughout the season and the best time will be used for the investigation. The participant will perform a back squat, one repetition max, at the end of each mesocycle and the best result will be recorded. Quintuple jump single leg will be performed from nine running steps during the competition season; as a result each leg best distance will be used. Technique will be recorded during the season and analyzed with computer software, so the participant will be educated in proper biomechanical motions during the triple jump performance. The weather conditions during the best performed results for the investigated param-

The subject will be coached and instructed in technical aspects of the event throughout the experiment. Prior to collecting data the subject will be not asked to perform anything different than every day practice routine. The research granted enough time as necessary for warm up and enough time as needed in between the attempts. The results of the triple jump will be used only from official competitions with certified officials. This testing protocol will be followed during the seasons. The data will be recorded and stored on spreadsheets and will be conserved on external hard drive. (See Table 2) Technique of the athlete was recorded during practice sessions and competition. Mistakes in the technical aspect of the jump were noticed and corrected through the preparatory seasons. During the execution of the jump, our subject exhibited a biomechanical error in the upper body. The left hand position during the “Step” was above the head. According to Miladinov (2004) hands position during “Step” phase have to be extended in the elbow joint and parallel to the ground. In his research he noticed a similar mistake for Olympic champion, Tereza Marinova from 2000).

Discussion Currently there is a lack of pedagogical research investigating the proper exercise parameters among triple jumpers, and the effect of these exercises over the triple jump progression in a long period of time. Triple jumpers coached with congruent exercise parameters, such as strength, horizontal velocity, plyometrics and proper techniques have been increasing their performance progressively. Well maintained balance of practice exercises is key factor of preventing overtraining, decreased performance, injuries from any character and even emotional frustration. The purpose of this one year long pedagogical study was to study the effect of four triple jump practice characteristics over the final triple jump result and demonstrate the positive correlation. Furthermore the research will elucidate proper building of the season conditioning for triple jumpers, and in addition will give insight for future research including proper structural building of triple jumpers.

Conclusion Many different methods can be used to increase investigated parameters. The number of repetitions, practice volumes, and variety of drills can be used depending on the athletes’ age and experience. Our research is presenting the fundamental importance of these four parameters and the strong relationship with the final triple jump distance. Not only does the triple jump depend on these four parameters, but they are congruently depending on each other (See Figure 1). Coaches’ approach to triple jump preparation is very individualized. The research demonstrated scientific and pedagogical approach for successful triple jump progression.

TRIPLE JUMP PRACTICE PARAMETERS

The four practice parameters can be used trough the all macrocycle, depending on the athlete’s goal. Ever more, these practice factors can be applied over any age or level of experience. The intensity, resistance and number repetitions are dependent on the athlete’s anthropological characteristics, coaching methods and season goal. To increase triple jump once again, the most important practice parameter established by the research is 40m sprint, back squat, single leg quintuple jump and jumping technique. An improvement of the athlete’s personal results of 40m sprint, squat, biomechanical jumping technique and single leg quintuple jump from short approach, will 42

techniques MAY 2015

undoubtedly lead to an improvement in the triple jump personal result.

References Ashby, B. M., & Heegaard, J.H. (2002). Role of arm motion in the standing long jump. Journal of biomechanics. 35, 1631-1637. Beachle, T., Earle, R. (2008). Essential of strength and conditioning: Human Kinetics. National Strength and Conditioning Association. 414-415. Dick, F.W. (2002). Sports training principles. London: Lepus Books. Golubtzov, A. (1988). The development of triple jump for women. Die Lehre der leichathletik, Germany, Vol. 32, No. 29 / 30, 1988.

Helmer Hommel. (2009). Bomechanical analyses of selected events at the 12th IAAF World Championship in Athletics, Berlin 15-23 August 2009. Scientific Research Project Biomechanical Analyses. 1-17. Hutt, E. (1988). Model technique analysis sheet for the horizontal jumps part II – the triple jump. New Studies in Athletics. (1988). Johnson, C. (1996). The elastic strength development of Jonathan Edwards. New Studies in Athletics. 11:2-3; 63-69. Kreyer, V. (1997). The keys to Jonathan Edwards’ success. Legkaya Atletica Russia, No.1, January 1997. Kreyer, V. (1992). About the female triple jump. Legkaya Atletica Russia, No.3, March, 1992. Kutz,M.2003.Theoretical and practical issues for plyometric training. NSCA’s Performance Training Journal. 2(2):10-12. Knoedel, J. (1984). Active landing in the triple jump. Track Technique. 88, 28142816. Lauder, M., Payton, C. (1995). Handle paddle in swimming : A specific form of resistance training. Swimming Times. 72 (12), 25-27. Lipse, J. (2010). Men’s Fitness. Phillips Idowu triple jump workout. Retrieved from http://www.mensfitness.co.uk/exercise/sports/5209/phillips_idowu_triple_ jump_workout.html. Miladinov, O., & Bonov, P. (2004). Individual approach in improving the technique of triple jump for woman. New Studies in Athletics, 19:4, 27-36. National Strength and Conditioning Association. (2008). Perttunen, J., Kyrolainen, H., Komi, P. V., & Heinonen, A. (2000). Biomechanical loading in the triple jump. Journal of Sport Sciences, 18, 363-370.

Bio: Iliyan Chamov is an Assistant Track & Field Coach at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville overseeing the Jumps. As a student-athlete at Lindenwood University, he claimed four consecutive NAIA national championship titles in the triple jump. kirby lee photo

techniques MAY 2015

Brad Dixon photo

Aerobic Power Building a Bigger Engine in an Emerging Miler By Scott Christensen

MAY 2015 techniques

Aerobic Power

ll of the standard distance races including cross country are combined zone races. Combined zone means energy needed for muscular contractions at race pace is derived from both the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems in combination. Improvement in both the capacity and efficiency of these independent energy systems, and how they work in tandem, is the reason distance runners train. The anaerobic energy system is improved with maximum, and near maximum velocity work. Gains in the system are made through neural improvement at the neuro-muscular junction, improved neuronmuscular biomechanics during maximum effort, and muscle cell changes allowing for greater drainage and tolerance of lactate and hydrogen ions. The energy contribution of the anaerobic system varies from 50 percent in the 800 meters to about 8 percent in the 5000 meters. The training emphasis of the anaerobic energy system is dictated by the preferred race distance of the athlete. The aerobic energy system contributes more than 50 percent of the energy needed to run a distance race at maximum race pace. The characteristics of the race distance will dictate the amount of aerobic training emphasis. Aerobic energy system development is centered on the physiological concept of aerobic power or what is commonly known as VO2 max velocity (vVO2 max). Aerobic power is simply the amount of oxygen that can be used by the working muscles of an organism over a prescribed time at full aerobic effort. The work time measured is generally between 5-10 minutes whether on a treadmill in the lab or out on the workout course. The results are then standardized as a per minute value of oxygen usage

techniques MAY 2015

per kilogram of body weight. This methodology allows the data to be compared from animal to animal or human to human. Since the lab test and field test have both a time and distance component, then velocity at maximum aerobic power effort can also be calculated. Improvement by the distance runner in training of this aerobic power velocity value translates to faster times in every race distance because aerobic power is a known fractional characteristic of all distance races. (See Table 1) Using vVO2 max as the index value, it is logical that as that number improves with training so do the linked fractional unit percentages at the other race distances. Using Table 1 data, one can determine that the race distance most associated with maximum aerobic power is the 3200 meter run. As fitness improves the percentage values shown do not change, but the associated velocity at each distance improves. As an example, at the start of the year a runner can run 11:00 for 3200 meters to exhaustion, or about 5:30 pace for each mile. The projected mark for the 1600 meters based on Table 1 should be 4:55. This index value is their current velocity at VO2 max, but as the season moves on so does the 3200 meter mark. Soon the athlete can run 10:30 or 5:15 pace for 3200 meters. Again referring to Table 1, the projected mile velocity at this new time should now be 4:41. The same velocity changes should occur for every race distance shown. The key in aerobic training is in improving the aerobic power value since that is the index value that physiologists have shown to be a key mark in aerobic fitness. Running economy, which is the efficiency in which the distance runner uses food energy and oxygen in movement, is influenced by aerobic power

because economy is heavily dependent on greater blood flow to the muscles. Running economy improves with vVO2 max training as does lactate threshold velocity. Improving aerobic power means developing a bigger heart, greater stroke volume, increased capillary beds, greater total blood volume and increases in mitochondria and enzymes. All of these are linked to improved running economy which can be thought of as simply the energy cost of movement. Aerobic power is considered the best quantitative measure of aerobic fitness. Commonly known as just VO2 max, it is useful for the running coach to determine what velocity is associated with present day aerobic power development in an athlete at that moment in time. Once the vVO2 max is determined it can be used to structure aerobic training loads and intensities in training units. The use of oxygen during aerobic metabolism rarely reaches a maximum in the average person. A human has to get within 88-90 percent of maximum heart rate to reach maximum oxygen use, however distance runners frequently reach such a threshold. Aerobic power and its correlated velocity can be determined during a treadmill test in the physiology lab. However, a field test over an exhaustive two mile run can be used to determine velocity at VO2 max which is the most important value for in any middle distance runnerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s profile. The lab value will determine milliliters of oxygen Brad Dixon photo

Aerobic Power

metabolized by each kilogram of body tissue per minute at maximum effort at about two mile pace. It has been shown that the VO2 max value is influenced by three variables: the genome of the individual, the maturity of the individual, and the aerobic fitness of the individual. An average untrained adult has a maximum value of about 35ml/kg/min of oxygen consumption. This value is rather low in comparison to other animals and reflects the non-migratory, walking lifestyle of humans. (See Table 2) It has been shown in many studies that aerobic power is highly trainable in distance runners if given the proper work stimulus. Several studies have shown a 20 percent improvement in VO2 max over 25 weeks of training. Improvement in aerobic power must come from one, or a combination of the variables, in the VO2 max mathematical equation known as the Fick equation. The Fick equation is: VO2 max = left-side ventricular stroke volume (SV) x heart rate (HR) x amount of oxygen removed from blood at muscle (aVO2). Through specific training, VO2 max can increase because of central development, which is concentrated in structural changes to the heart and building a greater blood volume. While HR improves little through any sort of training, SV can improve dramatically. Aerobic training has been shown to increase the size of the heart, especially 48

techniques MAY 2015

the left-side ventricle. The more oxygenated blood that leaves the heart towards the working muscles while running, the greater the improvement in running performance at sub-maximal speed. The training concern is the vast amount of time needed to increase the volume of the heart. The VO2 max equation (Fick equation) is also is influenced by the amount of oxygen extraction at the muscle. The equation indicates that VO2 max increases if more oxygen can be delivered by the heart and blood, and extracted by the muscle cells. The extraction variable can also be increased through specific training. Increases shown in VO2 max are thus influenced by peripheral development as well as central development. Peripheral factors are concentrated at the muscle-circulatory interface. It is both structural and bio-chemical in nature. Structurally, it involves synthesizing a greater capillarization network of beds touching the muscle. Some studies have shown an increase from two capillaries along a single muscle fiber in untrained humans to as many as seven capillaries along each muscle fiber after 27 weeks of specific training. The myoglobin content of the cell also increases as does the mitochondrial numbers within each muscle cell. Studies have shown a 2.5 times increase in mitochondrial numbers after 20 weeks of specific training. It has also been shown that aerobic enzyme quantity

also increases in conjunction with structural changes. General aerobic fitness and specific aerobic power both improve as VO2 max increases through training. Running velocity increases at a higher VO2 max value because the body is able to utilize a greater amount of oxygen. It is simple algebra, but the training is far from simple. Documented training schemes designed to improve aerobic power (vVO2 max) in distance runners were first described by the Soviet Sports Institute in the 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. Besides the Eastern Bloc countries, one of the athletics organizations to quickly pick up on the concept was the British Milers Club in the early 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. Frank Horwill, and a bit later Peter Coe, were two of the coaches to understand the value in improving aerobic power with very specific stimulus applications. Meanwhile, in the United States, David Costull PhD, David Martin PhD, Joe Vigil, PhD and Jack Daniels PhD were working distance runners through aerobic power training schemes and documenting their progress by rigorous application of the Scientific Method. These pioneers have shaped the modern day training protocol addressing improvement in aerobic power. Since the early days, it was theorized that aerobic power development was but one of four training domains used in preparing distance runners. Consider the standard track events of the 800 meter meters to the 10,000 meters. All of these are combined zone races to a degree. Anaerobic energy system development hinges on increasing lactate tolerance, while aerobically the three domains are: improving running economy, shifting the lactate threshold and boosting aerobic power. These four domains have varying influence based on the distance of the race. In races from the 1600 meters to the 6000 meter race in cross country, aerobic power is the major training stimulus used

Aerobic Power

in affecting performance. Aerobic power training sessions can be either continuous efforts or interval style in design. Aerobic power directed workloads are most effective if run precisely at date pace vVO2 max. Since this marker presumably improves as fitness improves during the macrocycle it is a progressive value that must be closely monitored for each runner. It is recommended that vVO2 max markers be updated once every three weeks with either a quantitative field test or a race that is comparable to their vVO2 max. Each runners date pace vVO2 max value should be part of their individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s athletic profile that is then used to structure many different aerobic training sessions. The total volume for each aerobic power training session should be within the range of 2400 meters to 6400 meters. The only exception may be an occasional 1600 meter total volume session during the tapering portion of the competitive training phase. If done as intervals, aerobic power work should always have a work to rest time ratio of 1:1 to insure a proper end of the session stimulus. Since vVO2 max varies from individual to individual, the recovery interval becomes problematic in a large and diverse training group. With clever administration and monitoring of the group these problems can be minimized. Since aerobic training loads are intensely done at an energy system contribution of 87 percent aerobic and 13 percent anaerobic, a race day warm-up of at least three miles is recommended, with all the dynamic movement diversity need to be ready to run at that velocity from the word go. Aerobic power training sessions must be done at least once during each microcycle while in season. Aerobic power training sessions done as a continuous effort: A continuous run at vVO2 max serves two purposes: it can be used as a date pace aerobic power fitness field test, or in practice it can be implemented as the single training stimulus itself. The single effort can never exceed 3200 meters in length. If the training theme for the day is to update the vVO2 max field test, then it must be treated as a 2 mile race among teammates at full effort. Once the final times are recorded for all of the runners, each effort can be cut in half to determine present day vVO2 max pace and the data can be placed in the updated individual athlete profile. As a training session, a single con50

techniques MAY 2015

tinuous effort done at vVO2 max could vary from 2400 meters to 3200 meters. These workouts are typically done on foul weather days or during the tapering period in order to minimize time at practice. It is also an appropriate developmental workout for novice runners. The pace should be done precisely at date vVO2 max. There is no recovery interval to address, so a 4-5 mile continuous effort at gentle aerobic threshold pace could be added after the hard effort to supplement the workout. Aerobic power training sessions done as interval style efforts: An interval style aerobic power training unit allows more than 3200 meters of total volume to be done for the training session. The work can vary from many repeats at 400 meters to a couple of repeats of 3200 meters. The more the repetitions, then the more the recovery intervals which again must be closely monitored with a work to rest ratio of 1:1. The total volume of the session rarely exceeds 6400 meters, but can go as high as 8600 meters in experienced runners, Aerobic power workloads require a 48 hour recovery before a similar stimulus can be applied. A few example training units can be found in Table 3. Aerobic power training sessions are cornerstone workouts for distance runners in the 800-6000 meter events. In races of this length the ability to utilize oxygen by the athlete is the limiting factor. Aerobic power training sessions are designed to improve the maximal use of oxygen. Years of scientific research have outlined to the coach the precise parameters of the aerobic power training stimulus that should be applied to gain the greatest VO2 max development in the least amount of time. Training should always follow the direction that the characteristics of the event shape the training sessions. Top qualityVO2 max training involves applying stimuli to both the central and peripheral areas of the system. Central development can be accomplished with many activities. The long run, LT run, tempo run and general base mileage volume work has great influence on central development. Peripheral development is a different story. Studies have shown that peripheral development is best accomplished with training velocities right at present day vVO2 max pace. Developing VO2 max is crucial in making distance runners faster. It is important to understand that both central and peripheral factors

must be improved to fully be effective training. Workouts stressing VO2 max must be highly individualized, closely monitored and complex. They are well worth the time and effort in fully developing aerobic power in middle distance runners and especially the mile. Physiologists have given coaches considerable information on the concept of aerobic power. Scientific evidence shows that all aerobic races are shaped by aerobic power and its development both before and after the runner reaches genetic maturity. It is important these principles are applied to developing distance runners.

Bio: Scott Christensen has been the Boys Cross Country and Track & Field Coach at Stillwater High School for over 30 years. He currently heads up the USTFCCCA Track & Field Academyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Endurance program and serves as the programs lead instructor.

ustfccca supporters

Through their ongoing support of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Associaton, these companies demonstrate their strong commitment to the sports of Track & Field and Cross Country. The USTFCCCA strongly encourages each member to purchase products and services from these supporters.

mondoworldwide.com

ucsspirit.com

hokaoneone.com beynonsports.com

rekortanspurtanadvpolytech.com balfour.com

mccallumplace.com

stockmeier-urethanes.com

dataathletics.com

gillathletics.com

techniques MAY 2015

directathletics.com

conica.com

ucsspirit.com mfathletic.com

coachesdirectory.com

asicsamerica.com

trainingpeaks.com

vsathletics.com

dartfish.com maxmedals.com athleticsuniverse.com

elliptigo.com

connorsports.com

tomtom.com

MAY 2015 techniques

2015 ustfccca national INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year division i

Lance Harter Arkansas Women’s COY

Robert Johnson Oregon Men’s COY

Petros Kyprianou Georgia Women’s Assistant COY

Andy Powell Oregon Men’s Asst. COY

Dominique Scott Arkansas Women’s Track AOY

Eric Jenkins Oregon Men’s Track AOY

Kendell Williams Georgia Women’s Field AOY

Marquis Dendy Florida Men’s Field AOY

division Ii

Kirk Pedersen Central Missouri Women’s COY

Kip Janvrin Central Missouri Women’s COY

Damon Martin Joe Lynn Adams State Hillsdale Men’s COY Women’s Asst. COY

Derrick Vicars Findlay Men’s Asst. COY

Emily Oren Kevin Batt Erika Kinsey Justin Welch Hillsdale Adams State Central Missouri Findlay Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

division IIi

Pat Healy UW-La Crosse Women’s COY

Chip Schneide UW-Eau Claire Men’s COY

Katie Wagner UW-La Crosse Women’s Assistant COY

Jeremy Deterville UW-Eau Claire Men’s Asst. COY

Maryann Gong MIT Women’s Track AOY

Mitchell Black Tufts Men’s Track AOY

Gladys Njoku Stevens Women’s Field AOY

Dominique Neloms UW-La Crosse Men’s Field AOY

NJCAA

Chris Beene South Plains Women’s COY Men’s COY

Blaine Wiley South Plains Women’s Asst. COY Men’s Asst. COY

Lydia Mato Barton County CC Women’s Track AOY

Harry Mulenga Central Arizona Men’s Track AOY

Tayla Greene Coffeyville CC Women’s Field AOY

Eldred Henry Central Arizona Men’s Field AOY

MAY 2015 techniques

division i 2015 ustfccca regional INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year great lakes region

Karen Dennis Ohio State Women’s COY

Dennis Mitchell Akron Men’s COY

Lisa Senakiewich Dave Astrauskas Michigan State Wisconsin Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Leah O’Connor Michigan State Women’s Track AOY

Clayton Murphy Akron Men’s Track AOY

Kelsey Card Wisconsin Women’s Field AOY

Michael Lihrman Wisconsin Men’s Field AOY

John Gondak Penn State Men’s COY

Michael Smith Brian Hirshblond Georgetown Monmouth Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Angel Piccirillo Villanova Women’s Track AOY

Dylan Capwell Monmouth Men’s Track AOY

Thea LaFond Maryland Women’s Field AOY

Darrell Hill Penn State Men’s Field AOY

Gary Pepin Nebraska Men’s COY

John Smith Adrian Wheatley Southern Illinois Illinois Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Erin Teschuk North Dakota State Women’s Track AOY

DJ Zahn Illinois Men’s Track AOY

Akela Jones Kansas State Women’s Field AOY

Christoff Bryan Kansas State Men’s Field AOY

Wes Kittley Texas Tech Men’s COY

Dion Miller Kirke Adamson Texas Tech Utah Valley Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Cierra White Texas Tech Women’s Track AOY

Cristian Soratos Montana State Men’s Track AOY

Chari Hawkins Utah State Women’s Field AOY

Jacorian Duffield Texas Tech Men’s Field AOY

mid atlantic region

Gina Procaccio Villanova Women’s COY

midwest region

Cliff Rovelto Kansas State Women’s COY

mountain region

Joe Franklin New Mexico Women’s COY

techniques MAY 2015

NORTHEAST region

Jason Saretsky Harvard Women’s COY

John Copeland Rhode Island Men’s COY

Kebba Tolbert Annette Acuff Harvard Binghamton Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Emily Sisson Providence Women’s Track AOY

Jesse Garn Binghamton Men’s Track AOY

Nikki Okwelogu Harvard Women’s Field AOY

Jonathan Jones Buffalo Men’s Field AOY

SOUTH region

Wayne Norton Georgia Women’s COY

Mike Holloway Florida Men’s COY

Nic Petersen Petros Kyprianou Florida Georgia Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Remona Burchell Alabama Women’s Track AOY

Najee Glass Florida Men’s Track AOY

Kendell Williams Georgia Women’s Field AOY

Marquis Dendy Florida Men’s Field AOY

SOUTH CENTRAL region

Lance Harter Arkansas Women’s COY

Mario Sategna Texas Men’s COY

Tonja Buford-Bailey Doug Case Texas Arkansas Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Dominique Scott Arkansas Women’s Track AOY

Omar McLeod Arkansas Men’s Track AOY

Demi Payne Stephen F. Austin Women’s Field AOY

Ryan Crouser Texas Men’s Field AOY

SOUTHEAST region

Mark Elliott Clemson Women’s COY

Dave Cianelli Virginia Tech Men’s COY

Josh Langley Ben Thomas North Carolina Virginia Tech Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Natoya Goule Clemson Women’s Track AOY

Thomas Curtin Virginia Tech Men’s Track AOY

Sha’Keela Saunders Kentucky Women’s Field AOY

Jonathan Addison NC State Men’s Field AOY

WEST region

Caryl Smith Gilbert Southern California Women’s COY

Robert Johnson Oregon Men’s COY

Curtis Taylor Andy Powell Oregon Oregon Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Shelby Houlihan Arizona State Women’s Track AOY

Eric Jenkins Oregon Men’s Track AOY

Ida Storm UCLA Women’s Field AOY

Bryan McBride Arizona State Men’s Field AOY

MAY 2015 techniques

division iI 2015 ustfccca regional INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year atlantic region

Dave Osanitsch Shippensburg Women’s COY

George Williams Saint Augustine’s Men’s COY

Karen Gaita East Stroudsburg Women’s Assistant COY

Steve Spence Shippensburg Men’s Assistant COY

Quanera Hayes Livingstone Women’s Track AOY

Omar Johnson Saint Augustine’s Men’s Track AOY

Christina O’Connor East Stroudsburg Women’s Field AOY

David Shaw Jr. Saint Augustine’s Men’s Field AOY

Jim Dilling Minnesota State Men’s COY

Kyle Rutledge Pittsburg State Women’s Assistant COY

Chris Parno Minnesota State Men’s Assistant COY

Ewa Zaborowska Harding Women’s Track AOY

Myles Hunter Minnesota State Men’s Track AOY

Erika Kinsey Central Missouri Women’s Field AOY

Tanner McNutt Pittsburg State Men’s Field AOY

central region

Mike Thorson U-Mary Women’s COY

east region

Karen Boen Stonehill Women’s COY

Leo Mayo Joe Van Gilder Bill Sutherland American International Southern Connecticut Southern Connecticut Men’s COY Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY COY

Ada Udaya Michael Biwott Michelle Grecni Michael Lee New Haven American International Southern Connecticut Southern Connecticut Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

midwest region

Jerry Baltes Grand Valley State Women’s COY

Jeremy Croy Tiffin Men’s COY

techniques MAY 2015

Joe Lynn Hillsdale Women’s Assistant COY

Derrick Vicars Findlay Men’s Assistant COY

Emily Oren Hillsdale Women’s Track AOY

Lamar Hargrove Tiffin Men’s Track AOY

Jamie Sindelar Ashland Women’s Field AOY

Justin Welch Findlay Men’s Field AOY

2015 ustfccca regional division iI INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year south region

David Cain Alabama-Huntsville Women’s COY

Frank Hyland Benedict Men’s COY

Soyini Thompson Katelin Barber Alabama-Huntsville Alabama-Huntsville Women’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Assistant COY

Alfred Chelanga Shorter Men’s Track AOY

Krishanda CampbellAlex May Brown Alabama-Huntsville Benedict Men’s Field AOY Women’s Field AOY

south central region

Bob DeVries New Mexico Highlands Women’s COY

Tom Dibbern Texas A&M-Commerce Men’s COY

Patrick Johnson Ross Smithey New Mexico Highlands Texas A&M-Commerce Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY COY

Jaylen Rodgers Angelo State Women’s Track AOY

Kevin Batt Adams State Men’s Track AOY

Salcia Slack New Mexico Highlands Women’s Field AOY

Seun Ogunmodede Colorado Mines Men’s Field AOY

southeast region

Jim Vahrenkamp Queens Women’s COY

Matt van Lierop Mount Olive Men’s COY

Travis LeFlore Wingate Women’s Assistant COY

Tyler Stepp Carson-Newman Men’s Assistant COY

Nikia Squire Marquett Simmons Jr. Christina Matheny Queens Limestone Wingate Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY

Tanner Stepp Carson-Newman Men’s Field AOY

west region

Preston Grey Azusa Pacific Women’s COY

Michael Friess Alaska Anchorage Men’s COY

Chris Reed Seattle Pacific Women’s Assistant COY

Ryan McWilliams Alaska Anchorage Men’s Assistant COY

Katelyn Steen Western Washington Women’s Track AOY

Jordan Edwards Academy of Art Men’s Track AOY

Megan VanWinkle Azusa Pacific Women’s Field AOY

Payton Lewis Northwest Nazarene Men’s Field AOY

MAY 2015 techniques

division iII 2015 ustfccca regional INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year atlantic region

Kate Curran St. Lawrence Women’s COY

Angelo Posillico SUNY Oneonta Men’s COY

Markus Allen Buffalo State Women’s Asst. COY

Jay Petsch Rochester Men’s Asst. COY

Amy Regan Stevens Women’s Track AOY

Matt Giannino RIT Men’s Track AOY

Gladys Njoku Stevens Women’s Field AOY

Samuel Taft Brockport Men’s Field AOY

Joe Dunham Central Men’s COY

Richard Maleniak St. Thomas Women’s Asst. COY

Melissa Norton Wartburg Men’s Asst. COY

Abrah Masterson Cornell College Women’s Track AOY

Eli Horton Central Men’s Track AOY

Kayla Hemann Wartburg Women’s Field AOY

Eric Larson Central Men’s Field AOY

Ashley Shaffer Denison Women’s Asst. COY

Keith Reiter Mount Union Men’s Asst. COY

Melanie Winters Baldwin Wallace Women’s Track AOY Women’s Field AOY

Tyler Mettille Mount Union Men’s Track AOY

Gary Aldrich Carnegie Mellon Men’s COY

Kimberly Lewnes Johns Hopkins Women’s Asst. COY

Norm Ayen Johns Hopkins Men’s Asst. COY

Cassidy Shepherd Westminster Women’s Field AOY

Andrew Bartnett Johns Hopkins Men’s Field AOY

central region

Marcus Newsom Wartburg Women’s COY

GREAT LAKES region

Kevin Lucas Mount Union Women’s COY Men’s COY

Sean Donnelly Mount Union Men’s Field AOY

MIDEAST region

Chris Wadas Misericordia Women’s COY

techniques MAY 2015

Charlie Marquardt Frances Loeb Haverford Johns Hopkins Women’s Track AOY Men’s Track AOY

2015 ustfccca regional division IiI INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year MIDWEST region

Chris Schumacher Illinois Wesleyan Women’s COY

Josh Buchholtz UW-La Crosse Men’s COY

Katie Wagner Wagner Women’s Asst. COY

Jeremy Deterville UW-Eau Claire Men’s Asst. COY

Claire Gordee UW-La Crosse Women’s Track AOY

David Voland Augustana Men’s Track AOY

Amber Williams UW-Platteville Women’s Field AOY

Dominique Neloms UW-La Crosse Men’s Field AOY

NEW ENGLAND region

Halston Taylor MIT Women’s COY

Thomas Smith Bridgewater State Men’s COY

Nicole Wilkerson Middlebury Women’s Asst. COY

Michael Hulme Bridgewater State Men’s Asst. COY

Maryann Gong MIT Women’s Track AOY

Mitchell Black Tufts Men’s Track AOY

Cimran Virdi MIT Women’s Field AOY

Sean Enos Bates Men’s Field AOY

SOUTH/southeast region

Tyler Wingard Denver Davis Christopher Newport Bridgewater Women’s COY Women’s Asst. COY Men’s COY

Micheal Hanks Christopher Newport Men’s Asst. COY

Hannah ChappellDick Eastern Mennonite Women’s Track AOY

Kevonte Shaw UT Tyler Men’s Track AOY

Enuma Ezenwa Dominique Torres Christopher Newport Christopher Newport Women’s Field AOY Men’s Field AOY

west region

John Smith George Fox Women’s COY Men’s COY

Adam Haldorson George Fox Women’s Asst. COY

Randy Dalzell George Fox Men’s Asst. COY

Allanah Whitehall Puget Sound Women’s Track AOY

Will Lawrence George Fox Men’s Track AOY

Maddie Smith Redlands Women’s Field AOY

Joseph Green Whitworth Men’s Field AOY

MAY 2015 techniques

NJCAA 2015 ustfccca regional INDOOR coaches & athletes of the year Atlantic

Michael Smart Essex County Women’s COY Men’s COY

Shirvon Greene Monroe Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Stephanie Boucher Mohawk Valley Women’s Track AOY

Ronaldo Ball Monroe Men’s Track AOY

Breaisha Morton ASA College Women’s Field AOY

Tony Davis Robert Wood Barton County Coffeyville Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY

Lydia Mato Barton County Women’s Track AOY

Sampson Laari Barton County Men’s Track AOY

Tayla Greene Coffeyville Women’s Field AOY

Johnnie Jackson Coffeyville Men’s Field AOY

Ryan Sanders Emmett Statzer Shellene WilliamsIowa Central Iowa Western Davis Women’s Assistant COY Men’s COY Iowa Western Men’s Assistant COY

Destiny Carter Iowa Central Women’s Track AOY

Robert Murphy Vincennes Men’s Track AOY

Martiesha Caines Iowa Central Women’s Field AOY

Isaiah Thomas Vincennes Men’s Field AOY

Morgan Hartsell South Plains Women’s Field AOY

Eldred Henry Central Arizona Men’s Field AOY

Keimon Barrow SUNY Delhi Men’s Field AOY

Central

Craig Perry Coffeyville Women’s COY

Dave Schenek Barton County Men’s COY

Midwest

Denny Myers Iowa Central Women’s COY

west

Chris Beene South Plains Women’s COY Men’s COY 62

Blaine Wiley Chrisann Gordon South Plains South Plains Women’s Assistant COY Women’s Track AOY Men’s Assistant COY

techniques MAY 2015

Harry Mulenga Central Arizona Men’s Track AOY