in every issue - cloud object storage | store & retrieve ... · in every issue 4 a letter from...

MAY 2015 techniques 1

in every issue4 A Letter from the President5 USTFCCCA Presidents

FeATures8 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

AWArDs55 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

conTenTsVolume 8 Number 4 / May 2015

coverPhotograph courtesy of Kirby Lee

8

44

34

4 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 publica-tion 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 70055-5969. If you would like to advertise your busi-ness in techniques, please contact Mike Corn

at (504) 599-8900 or [email protected].

The 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 docu-mented 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 happen-ing 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 meet-ings 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 pro-grams 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 coach-es, administrators and fans of our sport. Whether I agreed with a particular view-point 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-SULLIVANPresident, USTFCCCABeth is the Director of Men’s and Women’s Track & Field and Cross Country at the University of Tennessee. Beth can be reached at [email protected] .

A LeTTer FroM THe PresiDenT


usTFcccA PresiDenTs

DENNIS ShAVERNCAA Division I Track and FieldDennis Shaver is the Head Men’s and Women’s Track and Field Coach at Louisiana State University. Dennis can be reached at [email protected].

SEAN CLEARYNCAA Division I Cross CountrySean Cleary is the Head Women’s Track and Field and Cross Country coach at West Virginia University. Sean can be reached at [email protected].

SCoTT LoREKNCAA Division II Cross CountryScott 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 [email protected].

JAMES REIDNCAA Division II Track and FieldJames Reid is the Head Track and Field Coach and Assistant Athletic Director at Angelo State University. James can be reached at [email protected].

Division i

Division ii

Division iii

RobERT ShANKMANNCAA Division III Cross CountryRobert is the Head Cross Country and Track & Field coach at Rhodes College and can be reached at [email protected]

gARY ALDRIChNCAA Division III Track and FieldGary is the Associate Head Track & Field Coach at Carnegie Melon University and can be reached at [email protected]

8 techniques FEBURARY 2015

THe nATure oF sPeeDENhANCINg SPRINT ABILITIES ThROUgh A ShORT TO LONg TRAININg APPROACh.

THe nATure oF sPeeDkirby lee photo

FEBRUARY 2015 techniques 9

BrAD H. DEWEESE EDD | MAtt. L. SAMS, MA | JoEL H. WILLIAMS | CHrIS BELLon, MS


THe nATure oF sPeeD

The desire to outrun the competition is a trademark of many sporting endeavors. While there is compelling evidence sprint speed is ultimately limited by an ath-lete’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.

1.1 A BrIEf ovErvIEW on ProgrAMMIng tACtICSWhile a detailed discussion on training theory is beyond the scope of this paper, an overview on periodization and program-ming is provided to further support the need for properly aligned fitness phases. In the performance setting, the design of a prac-tice and competition plan is guided by the tenets of periodiza-tion. Specifically, periodization has been defined as the strategic manipulation of an athlete’s preparedness through the employ-ment 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 competi-tion. In addition, the workload undulates in a manner that bal-ances 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 program-ming 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, trans-mutation 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 comple-mentary manner in hopes of bolstering future periods of time as competition nears. These blocks could then be cycled as an ath-lete prepares for a subsequent competition.

Building from block, an advanced method of programming

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 previ-ously developed fitness qualities through the adoption of “retain-ing loads.” These retaining loads are established to either main-tain 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.

1.2 ConJugAtE SEquEntIAL ProgrAMMIng for SPEEDWithin the world of speed development, there are two tradition-ally 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 dis-tances 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 capac-ity 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 ath-lete 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 com-petitive 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 oppor-tunity 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 perfor-mance is not the result of cellular energy availability but is related


THe nATure oF sPeeD

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

2. founDAtIonAL ConStruCtS of SPEEDAs 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 veloc-ity against the onset of fatigue. As such, it can be inferred that an athlete who accelerates well can attain higher veloci-ties during the “top speed” portion of a sprint when training provides an optimal stimulus for the neurological and meta-bolic 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, manipula-tions to GRF can be made through correc-tive 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 bio-mechanical efficiencies can be enhanced and stabilized through the correct stag-ing 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

into the sprint position” (Francis, 1992).

2.1 forCE DELIvErySprinting is best described as a volitional activity that represents how fast an athlete can displace their mass in a linear direc-tion 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 sprint-ers separate themselves from their slower counterparts through the production of high forces within a minimal ground con-tact, 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 pro-duction 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 recov-ery 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 mechan-ics 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 MECHAnISMSThis 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-ten-don complex followed by an immediate shortening or contraction (Komi, 2008). This provides efficiency of movement, which may result in a more economi-cal usage of ATP and energy substrates (Weyand, Lin, & Bundle, 2006, Bundle & Weyand, 2012), along with minimized changes in hip height and subsequent

figure 1: Basic underpinnings of Sprint Speed


THe nATure oF sPeeD

braking forces. Conceptually the SSC is important for

sprinting as it underpins the spring-mass model (SMM). The SMM depicts sprint-ing as the result of a body mass bounc-ing 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 “mid-stance” 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-

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 for-ward 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 sprint-ers produce most of their vertical forces in the first half of a ground contact. In comparison, the stance phase of an aver-age 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 rela-tionship between the SSC, muscle stiff-ness and sprinting.

3.1 nEuroMuSCuLAr StruCturEThe 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 cross-sectional 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 asso-ciate 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

A sarcomere is the basic contractile unit that causes a muscle to shorten. Sarcomeres can be organized into “paral-lel” 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 sarco-meres 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 com-parison to other athletes.

While these characteristics provide the high forces required for sprinting, they are ultimately underpinned by the neurologi-cal 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, myelina-tion and dendritic branching can enhance the nerve’s ability to transmit an impulse to the muscle (Gardiner & Heckman, 1985, Gardiner, 1991). This improved transmis-sion provides the athlete a greater capac-ity to express higher forces over a shorter period of time. As a result, a sprinter may be able to apply higher rates of force dur-

ing the short ground contact times associ-ated with elite speed.

4.0 rELAtIng tHE nAturE of SPEED to ProgrAMMIngA sprinter’s physiological architec-ture, 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 periodiza-tion 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 accelera-tion, a sprinter may improve the biome-chanics and propulsive force-generating/delivering mechanisms (neuromuscular architecture), which then serve to sup-port and bolster their top speed. Once the athlete begins to dedicate training time for the maturity of maximum veloc-ity, 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-

figure 2: Building a Speed reserve through Investment in Acceleration

tinue to improve their chances over lon-ger 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)

4.1 BrEAkIng DoWn SPEED tHrougH An AnnuAL PLAnPreparing a sprinter for success in com-petition requires forethought and deliber-ate 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 com-petitive 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 develop-ment 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 accumu-lated 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 objec-

tives of the GPP, more specialized train-


ing is implemented, typically coinciding with an increase of intensity and task-specificity. 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 previ-ous phase of general training with the need for competitive readiness. Training within this time frame continues to fine-tune the previously listed fitness char-acteristics through the prescription of retraining loads, but places larger empha-sis 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 cat-

alyst 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 ath-letes, 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 SPEEDRecall that elite sprinters produce high rates of force within a short stance phase.

This abbreviated ground contact is related to a series of optimal biomechan-ics 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 com-petitive period punctuated with a taper and a period of complete rest. This dra-matic reduction in volume (and fitness) leads to a detrained state. Within sprint-ing, this detrained state could hypotheti-cally 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 rein-vestment in acceleration is justified.


THe nATure oF sPeeD

One method of re-establishing or improving an athlete’s accel-erative ability is incline sprint-ing. 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 prescrip-tion of resisted sprints (towing), which mimic the incline. The similarity between incline sprint-

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 accel-eration phase through a drastic reduction in an athlete’s starting hip height. With the hips start-ing at a lower height, the athlete is placed in a position that not only necessitates high force pro-duction 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 flat-ground sprinting.

In addition to the concen-trated loading of acceleration,

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-CoMPetItIonFollowing a training period that emphasizes acceleration, the sprinter is now equipped with the tools necessary to begin top speed development. Since an athlete’s maxi-mum velocity is dependent on their ability to produce and tolerate high rates of force through optimized biomechan-ics, 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 build-up 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 fly-zone 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 “fast-easy-fast” or “fly-float-fly.” Regardless of distance, the ath-lete 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 con-tinue sprinting with relaxed, flowing form. In the practical

figure 3: theoretical Design of a gPP

figure 4: theoretical Design of a PC


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 competi-tion 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 enhance-ment 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 (100-200m 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 CoMPEtItIonEntering 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 move-ment 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 compli-ment 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 non-racing 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 200-400m often, focusing practices on accelera-tion or speed endurance may assist in the retention of the speed reserve and force delivery mechanisms.

(See Figure 5)

5.0 ConCLuSIonThe 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 evidence-based progressions. Considering that most of the research on sprinting suggests that rac-ing success may be limited by force produc-tion, 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 improve-ments 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 accelera-tion, a higher maximum velocity may be attained. The increased velocity threshold may allow longer sprints to be run at a sub-maximal percentage that reduces neuromuscular fatigue that may impair an athlete’s ability to quickly produce, delive and tol-erate 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 devel-opment and refinement of sprint ability that can be used through-out an athlete’s career.

rEfErEnCESAagaard, 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

Figure 5: aligning the Phases of Sprint Development toward Competition


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 competi-tive racing distance on muscle fiber type com-position 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 volun-tary and evoked contractile properties. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 16(2), 209-218.

Billat, L. V. (2001). Interval training for perfor-mance: 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 perfor-mance: 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 exer-cise, 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 respons-es. The Journal of physiology, 150, 417-439.

Bundle MW and Weyand PG. (2012) Sprint exercise performance: does metabolic power mat-ter? 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 mus-cle enzymes and fiber composition in male and female track athletes. Journal of applied physiol-ogy, 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

THe nATure oF sPeeD

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 exhaus-tion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 1324-1331.

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: 181-186.

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 phospho-creatine recovery kinetics follow-ing moderate-intensity exercise in humans. Applied physiology, nutri-tion, and metabolism, 33(6), 1124-1131.

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


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 ath-letes. 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 biomechan-ics, 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 physi-cal fitness, 48(1), 65-75.

Komi, P. V. (2008). The stretch-shorten-ing 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 con-ditions of short and long sprint running. Biol Sport, 6(1), 43-59.

Niemi AK, & Majamaa K. (2005).

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 condi-tioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 26(10), 2655-2666.

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 sprint-ers. 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 strength-power-performance relationships in col-legiate 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 dis-tribution. 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 physi-ologica 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: inte-grating classical theory and contempo-rary 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 rela-tionships 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.

THe nATure oF sPeeD

Bios: Brad H. DeWeese EdD: Dr. DeWeese cur-rently 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 posi-tion, 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 super-vises the sprints & running events (up to 1500m), hurdles, throws and high jump. Coach Williams has produced numerous Big South All-Conference and NCAA Regional qualifica-tion performances during his eight-year tenure in Asheville, along with the school’s first All-American 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 essenTiALs

Mike CorN photo



Discus THroW essenTiALsMEChANICS FOR ThE PRACTITIONER

AND ThE ThROwERDr. AnDrEAS MAHErAS

The 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 throw-ing but they do constitute the frame upon which a sound technical pat-tern should be developed and they do make up the essential elements that a practitioner should have in mind and upon which the throw-ing 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 prac-titioner and the thrower are really after during a proper execution of the throw.

BrIEf ovErvIEW of SPEED gEnErAtIon In DISCuS tHroWIngDuring the throw the feet exert forc-es 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 hori-zontally across the circle (see figure 1). During the delivery, the thrower loses some of that momentum and obtains vertical linear momen-tum. The result of the forward and upward linear momentum is a con-tribution 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 momen-tum 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 respon-sible for imparting horizontal veloc-ity 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 per-cent contributed by the angular momentum around the vertical axis. Similarly, the upward linear momen-tum accounts for approximately 10 percent of the vertical speed of the discus at release, with the remain-ing 90 percent contributed by the angular momentum around the hori-zontal axis. Therefore, most of the speed of the discus is due to angular momentum not linear momentum. Rotary momentum around the verti-cal axis generates horizontal speed which is transmitted to the discus at release. Angular momentum around the horizontal axis generates verti-cal 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


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 sup-port 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 deliv-ery 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 CIrCLE1. 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

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 direc-tion 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 con-sequently 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 counter-clockwise rotation around the body and then it should be thrust aggres-sively 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,


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

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 aggres-sively 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 sys-tem (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 genera-tion 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” posi-tion 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 sys-tem center of mass and points from the lower part to the upper part of the sys-tem. If the system tilts, this axis tilts also.

ANdreAs MAherAs photo


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 angu-lar 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 sys-tem (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 para-mount importance in the course of discus throwing. There are six differ-ent 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 express-es a well wound up position, which is good, since the ensuing unwinding will help the thrower to transfer angu-lar 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.

DELIvEry1. 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

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 gen-erate 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 dur-ing the delivery. This can be achieved by slowing down the arm’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 system’s cen-ter 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 dur-ing 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 hori-zontal 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 con-tributes 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 hori-zontal speed to contribute to the hori-zontal speed of the discus at release. If shifting directly over the left is not feasible, then push diagonally, not directly backwards, to ensure horizon-tal velocity generation. Ensure that dur-ing 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 land-ing 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 ver-tical axis. Close to 90 percent of the eventual total momentum is developed in the back of the circle during the first



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

double and single supports. Weak swing-ing 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 partici-pate 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 dur-ing 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 reac-tion and the subsequent acquisition of a good amount of vertical speed to contrib-ute 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 anal-ysis 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 for-ward, or oblique). The contribution of the horizontal speed of the system to the hori-zontal 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.

• 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, aver-age) 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, moder-ate 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 direc-tions 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 throw-ing action according to the guidelines given above.

AutHor’S notEDecrease 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 trav-el 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 dis-cus 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 skill-ful 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.

rEfErEnCESDapena, 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.


kirby lee photo34 techniques MAY 2015


The triple jump is a complex bio-mechanical act that can be divided into four different stages: accel-eration, take off, flight phase and landing. Running during the accel-

eration phase represents biomechanical motions of rhythmic character, based on the running steps before the board. After acceleration, the triple jump has arrhyth-mic characteristics presented as three take offs and three flight phases, termino-logically 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 over-come this myth, many coaches seem to be concentrating on the strength prepara-tion 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 exam-ines 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: SpeedAccording to NCAA, IAAF and Olympic track and field rules, the distance in the triple jump is measured from the take-off 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 fol-lowing research shows evidence that pre-serving 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 athlete’s ability to gener-ate 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 addi-tion, 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 take-off board and maintain, or develop this speed during the jump (Hommel et al., 2009). The triple jump athlete must be

Four practice parameters in successFul triple jump For beginners, advanced

and proFessional track and Field athletes

iLiyan Chamov

Triple JumpPractice Parameters


TRIPLE JUMP PRACTICE PARAMETERS

able to resist personal body weight gravi-tational 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 produc-tion 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 veloc-ity,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 spe-cifically, 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 jump-ers, 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)

In 2009, Hommel presented supporting evidence of how the short sprint played an important role in “Scientific Research Project Biomechanical Analyses” con-ducted during the world championship in Berlin. The data demonstrated how the top 12 triple jumpers’ horizontal veloc-ity 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 correla-tion 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, includ-ing the foot. Lower horizontal velocity in the all phases of the jump leads to pro-longed 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 simul-taneously adapt biomechanically to the triple jump loading characteristics. Early in the season it is beneficial for the ath-lete 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 gen-eration 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 power-ful triple jump. (Kreyer,1992)

Kravets’ coach, Vitold Kreyer has sug-gested 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).

StRengthResearch 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 fore-foot. This research involved placing 16 pressure sensors over the planter foot on seven jumpers, then asking them to perform six triple jumps. The data accu-mulated 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 con-trolling 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 accord-ing to the Perttunen’s research. The pres-sure over the foot and the muscle groups involved in the squat, make this exercise very effective with its similarity in biome-chanical 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 cur-rent world record. Research continues further with significant results observed in Conley, the second best jumper dur-ing that period. His ground contact decreased from 0.43 to 0.40 sec. respec-tively, with his result increasing from 17.45 m. to 17.86 m. (Portnoy,2008). Both of these world level athletes demonstrat-ed 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 maintain-ing periods are squat, clean and bench press (Weiser,2002). According to Coach Johnson released Edwards’ practices, his strength results increased dramati-cally 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 exe-cuted three times a week in his practice schedule (Beil,2001).

SingLe Leg muLtipLe jumpS (pLyometRiCS)Single leg multiple jumps is a form of ply-ometric exercises. The National Strength and Conditioning Association (2008), separates plyometrics in to two different phases: mechanical and neurophysiologi-cal. The mechanical part of the plyomet-rics 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, neurophysi-ological, is under muscle spindle regula-tion. 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.414-415). Implementing plyometric type exer-cises 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 bal-ance. Dick (2002) explained how impor-tant 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)

teChniqueIt 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 hori-zontal 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 col-lected 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 bal-ance 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 con-cluded 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 mini-mal 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.

methodoLogyThe purpose of this study was to inves-tigate the combined effect of four main triple jump practice parameters among


table 2

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, quintu-ple jump single leg and technique implementations to inves-tigate 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.

paRtiCipantSThe 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 deSignThe 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 dis-tance will be used. Technique will be recorded during the season and analyzed with computer software, so the par-ticipant will be educated in proper biomechanical motions during the triple jump performance. The weather conditions during the best performed results for the investigated param-

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 tech-nique. 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)

pRoCeduReThe subject will be coached and instructed in technical aspects of the event through-out the experiment. Prior to collecting data the subject will be not asked to perform any-thing different than every day practice routine. The research granted enough time as neces-sary 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 test-ing protocol will be followed during the seasons. The data will be recorded and stored on spreadsheets and will be con-served 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 prepara-tory seasons. During the execu-tion 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).

diSCuSSionCurrently there is a lack of ped-agogical 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 congru-ent exercise parameters, such as strength, horizontal velocity, plyometrics and proper tech-niques have been increasing their performance progres-sively. Well maintained balance of practice exercises is key factor of preventing overtrain-ing, 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 condi-tioning for triple jumpers, and in addition will give insight for future research including proper structural building of triple jumpers.

ConCLuSionMany 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 fundamen-tal 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 suc-cessful triple jump progression.


figure 1


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 anthropologi-cal 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 quin-tuple jump and jumping technique. An improvement of the athlete’s personal results of 40m sprint, squat, biomechani-cal jumping technique and single leg quintuple jump from short approach, will

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

RefeRenCeSAshby, 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 prin-ciples. London: Lepus Books.

Golubtzov, A. (1988). The development of triple jump for women. Die Lehre der leichathletik, Germany, Vol. 32, No. 29 / 30, 1988.

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 cham-pionship titles in the triple jump.


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 analy-sis 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 practi-cal 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, 2814-2816.

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/exer-cise/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.

kirby lee photo

44 techniques MAY 2015 brad dixon photo

building a bigger engine in an emerging milerBy SCott ChRiStenSen

Aerobic Power



All of the standard distance races includ-ing 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 effi-ciency 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 improve-ment at the neuro-muscular junction, improved neuron-muscular biomechanics during maximum effort, and muscle cell changes allowing for greater drainage and tolerance of lac-tate 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 per-cent 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 train-ing 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

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 cal-culated. 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 frac-tional characteristic of all dis-tance 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 dis-tance 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 pro-jected 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 dis-tance shown. The key in aero-bic training is in improving the aerobic power value since that is the index value that physi-ologists have shown to be a key mark in aerobic fitness.

Running economy, which is the efficiency in which the dis-tance runner uses food energy and oxygen in movement, is influenced by aerobic power

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 mea-sure 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 deter-mined 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 runner’s profile. The lab value will determine milliliters of oxygen

brad dixon photo


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 dra-matically. Aerobic training has been shown to increase the size of the heart, especially

the left-side ventricle. The more oxygen-ated 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 oxy-gen 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 develop-ment. Peripheral factors are concentrated at the muscle-circulatory interface. It is both structural and bio-chemical in nature. Structurally, it involves synthesizing a great-er 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

AERobIC PowER

also increases in conjunction with structural changes.

General aerobic fitness and spe-cific aerobic power both improve as VO2 max increases through training. Running velocity increas-es 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 1970’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 1980’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 prepar-ing 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 ener-gy 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 influ-ence 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


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 progres-sive value that must be closely monitored for each runner. It is recommended that vVO2 max mark-ers be updated once every three weeks with either a quantitative field test or a race that is compa-rable to their vVO2 max. Each runners date pace vVO2 max value should be part of their individu-al’s athletic profile that is then used to structure many different aerobic training sessions.

The total volume for each aerobic power train-ing 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 con-tinuous 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 con-

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 prac-tice. It is also an appropriate developmental work-out 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 inter-val 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 repeti-tions, 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 cor-nerstone 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 oxy-gen. 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 periph-eral 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 devel-opment. Peripheral development is a different story. Studies have shown that peripheral devel-opment is best accomplished with training veloci-ties right at present day vVO2 max pace.

Developing VO2 max is crucial in making dis-tance runners faster. It is important to under-stand that both central and peripheral factors

AERobIC PowER

must be improved to fully be effective train-ing. Workouts stress-ing 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 dis-tance runners and especially the mile.

Physiologists have given coaches consid-erable information on the concept of aero-bic power. Scientific evidence shows that all aerobic races are shaped by aerobic power and its devel-opment both before and after the runner reaches genetic matu-rity. 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 Academy’s Endurance program and serves as the programs lead instructor.


beynonsports.com

mondoworldwide.com ucsspirit.com

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.

rekortanspurtanadvpolytech.com

hokaoneone.com

balfour.com

dataathletics.com

gillathletics.com

mccallumplace.com

stockmeier-urethanes.com

directathletics.com

conica.com

USTfCCCA SUPPoRTERS


stockmeier-urethanes.com

tomtom.com

trainingpeaks.com

mfathletic.com

asicsamerica.com

vsathletics.com

coachesdirectory.com

ucsspirit.com

maxmedals.com

dartfish.com

athleticsuniverse.com

connorsports.com

elliptigo.com


2015 ustfccca nationalinDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Division i

Division ii

Division iii

nJcaa

Robert JohnsonOregon

Men’s COY

Damon MartinAdams StateMen’s COY

Chip SchneideUW-Eau Claire

Men’s COY

Blaine WileySouth Plains

Women’s Asst. COYMen’s Asst. COY

Petros KyprianouGeorgia

Women’s Assistant COY

Joe LynnHillsdale

Women’s Asst. COY

Katie WagnerUW-La Crosse


Andy PowellOregon

Men’s Asst. COY

Derrick VicarsFindlay

Men’s Asst. COY

Jeremy DetervilleUW-Eau Claire

Men’s Asst. COY

Dominique ScottArkansas

Women’s Track AOY

Emily OrenHillsdale

Women’s Track AOY

Maryann GongMIT

Women’s Track AOY

Lydia MatoBarton County CC

Women’s Track AOY

Eric JenkinsOregon

Men’s Track AOY

Kevin BattAdams State

Men’s Track AOY

Mitchell BlackTufts

Men’s Track AOY

Harry MulengaCentral Arizona

Men’s Track AOY

Kendell WilliamsGeorgia

Women’s Field AOY

Erika KinseyCentral Missouri

Women’s Field AOY

Gladys NjokuStevens

Women’s Field AOY

Tayla GreeneCoffeyville CC

Women’s Field AOY

Marquis DendyFlorida

Men’s Field AOY

Justin WelchFindlay

Men’s Field AOY

Dominique NelomsUW-La Crosse

Men’s Field AOY

Eldred HenryCentral ArizonaMen’s Field AOY

Lance HarterArkansas

Women’s COY

Kip JanvrinCentral Missouri

Women’s COY

Kirk PedersenCentral Missouri

Women’s COY

Pat HealyUW-La CrosseWomen’s COY

Chris BeeneSouth PlainsWomen’s COY

Men’s COY


Division i 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Karen DennisOhio State

Women’s COY

Gina ProcaccioVillanova

Women’s COY

Cliff RoveltoKansas StateWomen’s COY

Joe FranklinNew Mexico

Women’s COY

Dennis MitchellAkron

Men’s COY

John GondakPenn StateMen’s COY

Gary PepinNebraska

Men’s COY

Wes KittleyTexas TechMen’s COY

Lisa SenakiewichMichigan State


Michael SmithGeorgetown


John SmithSouthern Illinois


Dion MillerTexas Tech


Dave AstrauskasWisconsin

Men’s Assistant COY

Brian HirshblondMonmouth


Adrian WheatleyIllinois


Kirke AdamsonUtah Valley


Leah O’ConnorMichigan State

Women’s Track AOY

Angel PiccirilloVillanova

Women’s Track AOY

Erin TeschukNorth Dakota StateWomen’s Track AOY

Cierra WhiteTexas Tech

Women’s Track AOY

Clayton MurphyAkron

Men’s Track AOY

Dylan CapwellMonmouth

Men’s Track AOY

DJ ZahnIllinois

Men’s Track AOY

Cristian SoratosMontana State

Men’s Track AOY

Kelsey CardWisconsin

Women’s Field AOY

Thea LaFondMaryland

Women’s Field AOY

Akela JonesKansas State

Women’s Field AOY

Chari HawkinsUtah State

Women’s Field AOY

Michael LihrmanWisconsin

Men’s Field AOY

Darrell HillPenn State

Men’s Field AOY

Christoff BryanKansas State

Men’s Field AOY

Jacorian DuffieldTexas Tech

Men’s Field AOY

gReat lakes Region

miD atlantic Region

miDwest Region

mountain Region


Division i 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Jason SaretskyHarvard

Women’s COY

Wayne NortonGeorgia

Women’s COY

Lance HarterArkansas

Women’s COY

Mark ElliottClemson

Women’s COY

Caryl Smith GilbertSouthern California

Women’s COY

John CopelandRhode IslandMen’s COY

Mike HollowayFlorida

Men’s COY

Mario SategnaTexas

Men’s COY

Dave CianelliVirginia TechMen’s COY

Robert JohnsonOregon

Men’s COY

Kebba TolbertHarvard


Nic PetersenFlorida


Tonja Buford-BaileyTexas


Josh LangleyNorth Carolina


Curtis TaylorOregon


Annette AcuffBinghamton


Petros KyprianouGeorgia


Doug CaseArkansas


Ben ThomasVirginia Tech


Andy PowellOregon


Emily SissonProvidence

Women’s Track AOY

Remona BurchellAlabama

Women’s Track AOY

Dominique ScottArkansas

Women’s Track AOY

Natoya GouleClemson

Women’s Track AOY

Shelby HoulihanArizona State

Women’s Track AOY

Jesse GarnBinghamton

Men’s Track AOY

Najee GlassFlorida

Men’s Track AOY

Omar McLeodArkansas

Men’s Track AOY

Thomas CurtinVirginia Tech

Men’s Track AOY

Eric JenkinsOregon

Men’s Track AOY

Nikki OkweloguHarvard

Women’s Field AOY

Kendell WilliamsGeorgia

Women’s Field AOY

Demi PayneStephen F. Austin

Women’s Field AOY

Sha’Keela SaundersKentucky

Women’s Field AOY

Ida StormUCLA

Women’s Field AOY

Jonathan JonesBuffalo

Men’s Field AOY

Marquis DendyFlorida

Men’s Field AOY

Ryan CrouserTexas

Men’s Field AOY

Jonathan AddisonNC State

Men’s Field AOY

Bryan McBrideArizona State

Men’s Field AOY

noRtheast Region

south Region

south centRal Region

southeast Region

west Region


Division ii 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaRatlantic Region

centRal Region

east Region

miDwest Region

Dave OsanitschShippensburgWomen’s COY

Mike ThorsonU-Mary

Women’s COY

Karen BoenStonehill

Women’s COY

Jerry BaltesGrand Valley State

Women’s COY

George WilliamsSaint Augustine’s

Men’s COY

Jim DillingMinnesota State

Men’s COY

Leo MayoAmerican International

Men’s COY

Jeremy CroyTiffin

Men’s COY

Karen GaitaEast Stroudsburg


Kyle RutledgePittsburg State


Joe Van GilderSouthern Connecticut


Joe LynnHillsdale


Steve SpenceShippensburg


Chris ParnoMinnesota State


Bill SutherlandSouthern ConnecticutMen’s Assistant COY

Derrick VicarsFindlay


Quanera HayesLivingstone

Women’s Track AOY

Ewa ZaborowskaHarding

Women’s Track AOY

Ada UdayaNew Haven

Women’s Track AOY

Emily OrenHillsdale

Women’s Track AOY

Omar JohnsonSaint Augustine’sMen’s Track AOY

Myles HunterMinnesota StateMen’s Track AOY

Michael BiwottAmerican International

Men’s Track AOY

Lamar HargroveTiffin

Men’s Track AOY

Christina O’ConnorEast Stroudsburg

Women’s Field AOY

Erika KinseyCentral Missouri

Women’s Field AOY

Michelle GrecniSouthern Connecticut

Women’s Field AOY

Jamie SindelarAshland

Women’s Field AOY

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

Tanner McNuttPittsburg StateMen’s Field AOY

Michael LeeSouthern Connecticut

Men’s Field AOY

Justin WelchFindlay

Men’s Field AOY


Division ii 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Division ii2015 ustfccca RegionalinDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

south Region

south centRal Region

southeast Region

west Region

David CainAlabama-Huntsville

Women’s COY

Bob DeVriesNew Mexico High-

landsWomen’s COY

Jim VahrenkampQueens

Women’s COY

Preston GreyAzusa PacificWomen’s COY

Frank HylandBenedict

Men’s COY

Tom DibbernTexas A&M-Com-

merceMen’s COY

Matt van LieropMount OliveMen’s COY

Michael FriessAlaska Anchorage

Men’s COY

Soyini ThompsonAlabama-Huntsville

Women’s Assistant COYMen’s Assistant COY

Patrick JohnsonNew Mexico Highlands


Travis LeFloreWingate


Chris ReedSeattle Pacific


Katelin BarberAlabama-HuntsvilleWomen’s Track AOY

Ross SmitheyTexas A&M-CommerceMen’s Assistant COY

Tyler SteppCarson-Newman


Ryan McWilliamsAlaska Anchorage


Alfred ChelangaShorter

Men’s Track AOY

Jaylen RodgersAngelo State

Women’s Track AOY

Nikia SquireQueens

Women’s Track AOY

Katelyn SteenWestern WashingtonWomen’s Track AOY

Krishanda Campbell-Brown

BenedictWomen’s Field AOY

Kevin BattAdams State

Men’s Track AOY

Marquett Simmons Jr.Limestone

Men’s Track AOY

Jordan EdwardsAcademy of Art

Men’s Track AOY

Alex MayAlabama-Huntsville

Men’s Field AOY

Salcia SlackNew Mexico High-

landsWomen’s Field AOY

Christina MathenyWingate

Women’s Field AOY

Megan VanWinkleAzusa Pacific

Women’s Field AOY

Seun OgunmodedeColorado MinesMen’s Field AOY

Tanner SteppCarson-NewmanMen’s Field AOY

Payton LewisNorthwest Nazarene

Men’s Field AOY


Division iii 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaRatlantic Region

centRal Region

gReat lakes Region

miDeast Region

Kate CurranSt. Lawrence

Women’s COY

Marcus NewsomWartburg

Women’s COY

Kevin LucasMount Union

Women’s COYMen’s COY

Chris WadasMisericordia

Women’s COY

Angelo PosillicoSUNY Oneonta

Men’s COY

Joe DunhamCentral

Men’s COY

Ashley ShafferDenison

Women’s Asst. COY

Gary AldrichCarnegie Mellon

Men’s COY

Markus AllenBuffalo State

Women’s Asst. COY

Richard MaleniakSt. Thomas

Women’s Asst. COY

Keith ReiterMount Union

Men’s Asst. COY

Kimberly LewnesJohns Hopkins

Women’s Asst. COY

Jay PetschRochester

Men’s Asst. COY

Melissa NortonWartburg

Men’s Asst. COY

Melanie WintersBaldwin Wallace

Women’s Track AOYWomen’s Field AOY

Norm AyenJohns Hopkins

Men’s Asst. COY

Amy ReganStevens

Women’s Track AOY

Abrah MastersonCornell College

Women’s Track AOY

Tyler MettilleMount Union

Men’s Track AOY

Frances LoebJohns Hopkins

Women’s Track AOY

Matt GianninoRIT

Men’s Track AOY

Eli HortonCentral

Men’s Track AOY

Charlie MarquardtHaverford

Men’s Track AOY

Gladys NjokuStevens

Women’s Field AOY

Kayla HemannWartburg

Women’s Field AOY

Sean DonnellyMount Union

Men’s Field AOY

Cassidy ShepherdWestminster

Women’s Field AOY

Samuel TaftBrockport

Men’s Field AOY

Eric LarsonCentral

Men’s Field AOY

Andrew BartnettJohns Hopkins

Men’s Field AOY


Division iii 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Division iii2015 ustfccca RegionalinDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

miDwest Region

new englanD Region

south/southeast Region

west Region

Chris SchumacherIllinois WesleyanWomen’s COY

Halston TaylorMIT

Women’s COY

Josh BuchholtzUW-La Crosse

Men’s COY

Thomas SmithBridgewater State

Men’s COY

Tyler WingardChristopher Newport


John SmithGeorge Fox


Katie WagnerWagner

Women’s Asst. COY

Nicole WilkersonMiddlebury

Women’s Asst. COY

Denver DavisBridgewater

Women’s Asst. COY

Adam HaldorsonGeorge Fox

Women’s Asst. COY

Jeremy DetervilleUW-Eau Claire

Men’s Asst. COY

Michael HulmeBridgewater StateMen’s Asst. COY

Micheal HanksChristopher Newport

Men’s Asst. COY

Randy DalzellGeorge Fox

Men’s Asst. COY

Claire GordeeUW-La Crosse

Women’s Track AOY

Maryann GongMIT

Women’s Track AOY

Hannah Chappell-Dick

Eastern MennoniteWomen’s Track AOY

Allanah WhitehallPuget Sound

Women’s Track AOY

David VolandAugustana

Men’s Track AOY

Mitchell BlackTufts

Men’s Track AOY

Kevonte ShawUT Tyler

Men’s Track AOY

Will LawrenceGeorge Fox

Men’s Track AOY

Amber WilliamsUW-Platteville

Women’s Field AOY

Cimran VirdiMIT

Women’s Field AOY

Enuma EzenwaChristopher NewportWomen’s Field AOY

Maddie SmithRedlands

Women’s Field AOY

Dominique NelomsUW-La Crosse

Men’s Field AOY

Sean EnosBates

Men’s Field AOY

Dominique TorresChristopher Newport

Men’s Field AOY

Joseph GreenWhitworth

Men’s Field AOY


nJcaa 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

Michael SmartEssex County Women’s COY

Men’s COY

Craig PerryCoffeyville

Women’s COY

Denny MyersIowa Central Women’s COY

Chris BeeneSouth PlainsWomen’s COY

Men’s COY

Shirvon GreeneMonroe


Dave SchenekBarton County

Men’s COY

Emmett StatzerIowa Western

Men’s COY

Blaine WileySouth Plains


Tony DavisBarton County


Ryan SandersIowa Central


Chrisann GordonSouth Plains

Women’s Track AOY

Stephanie BoucherMohawk Valley

Women’s Track AOY

Robert WoodCoffeyville


Shellene Williams-Davis

Iowa Western Men’s Assistant COY

Harry MulengaCentral Arizona

Men’s Track AOY

Ronaldo BallMonroe

Men’s Track AOY

Lydia MatoBarton County

Women’s Track AOY

Destiny CarterIowa Central

Women’s Track AOY

Morgan HartsellSouth Plains

Women’s Field AOY

Breaisha MortonASA College

Women’s Field AOY

Sampson LaariBarton County

Men’s Track AOY

Robert MurphyVincennes

Men’s Track AOY

Eldred HenryCentral ArizonaMen’s Field AOY

Keimon BarrowSUNY Delhi

Men’s Field AOY

Tayla GreeneCoffeyville

Women’s Field AOY

Martiesha CainesIowa Central

Women’s Field AOY

Johnnie JacksonCoffeyville

Men’s Field AOY

Isaiah ThomasVincennes

Men’s Field AOY

atlantic

centRal

miDwest

west

nJcaa 2015 ustfccca Regional inDooR coaches & athletes of the yeaR

in every issue - cloud object storage | store & retrieve ... · in every issue 4 a letter from...

Documents