TMEGC Verkhoshansky Block System Training in Endurance Running
TMEGC Verkhoshansky Block System Training in Endurance Running
TMEGC Verkhoshansky Block System Training in Endurance Running
The following book abstract is a special submission to the Canadian Athletics Coaching
Centre from Russian sport science great Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky. The full book is
available at http://www.verkhoshansky.com. Posted along with this article is a copy of
t
hebook’ st abl eofcont entsandpr ef
ace.
In this book there is an example of how can be developed a Block Training System
program in endurance sport disciplines. The example reported is the first application of
Block Training System developed for Track & Field middle and long distance running
(1500 m –10000 m).
1) What are the base mechanisms and the limiting factors of the sport result increasing
in the endurance running?
The physiological and biochemical research on intense muscular activity confirms
that the endurance training of Track & Field runners should not only be based on
increasing of maximum oxygen consumption (VO2max) and cardiac output, but also
on improving of the oxidative capacity and the contractile capacity of muscles
involved in executing the competition exercise.
In the second part of the book is presented the Block Training System conceptual model
of the Preparation cycle of the long and middle distance running with the explanation of
the methodological process of conjugated training planning/programming and
description of each training means (the execution technique of each exercise and the
methods of their use) including resistance exercises to improve LME, uphill running and
specifics sprint running exercises.
In the last part of the book are presented the results of the experimental testing of the
training model.
The training system model has been tested for the first time with middle distance
runners of middle-high level and subsequently with middle and long distance runners of
the Soviet National Team (Kulichenko, 1986). The data of the two experiments were
concordant and they have led to the same conclusions.
Since the first experiment was widely exploratory, the obtained data was more
significant and more specific than those of the second experiment; this is why we have
chosen to illustrate the results of the first experiment.
The experiment lasted three years and prescribed two preparation cycles in the training
year.
The experimental group included 8 middle distance runners, who followed the
previously described training program, with only one difference: instead of uphill running
alternating jumps (ten-fold and five-fold) were executed using the serial-repetition
method.
The control group consisted of 10 athletes of the same athletic level as the athletes from
the experimental group and they carried out a training program based on the traditional
model.
The main differences between the training programs of the two groups were:
the distribution of loads with different finalization during the preparatory cycle
which, in the experimental group, was conjugate sequence, while in the control
group was concurrent;
the method of resistance exercises used: the experimental group used the
method to develop Local Muscular Endurance, the control group used traditional
methods that include only general, non specific resistance training;
ther esist anceexer ci
se’sloadvol umes:t hepr ogram oft heexper i
ment algr oup
prescribed a higher volume of resistance and jump work but a lower volume of
distance running than that of the experimental group.
In the book are showed the results of the experiment related to:
the most important parameters of running and their correlations with test results;
the influence of training loads on running parameters and on control test
parameters;
the parameters of the LME Test and to their evolution under the influence of
interval resistance work.
The general results of the experiment showed that at the end of the experiment, the
athletes of the experiment algroupt hatcar riedoutat
ot alyear’svol umeofdi stanc e
running work (3000-3500 m), that was 2 times lower than control group (6000-7000 m),
showed results, in the running of 800 m, 1500 m and 3000 m, that were considerably
better than the athletes of the control group.
In the experimental group, the development, during the three years of the Local
Muscular
Endurance training through the use of specialized resistance exercises, assured an
increase in:
In the control group, that used a traditional methodology, these increases were lower:
1.7% and 2.8% respectively