coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../ultra40a.pdf
There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.
Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?
Thanks!
I am going fast and hard on my USRPT repeats, but not AFAP. That is why I believe, for me, in training for the 400, this is ideal and so far it works. I have said from the beginning that I don't know if I could do this training if I was training for the 100 or maybe even the 200.
For what it's worth, Glenn, Rushall told me that the difference between 100 percent effort and 95 percent effort is close to negligible because of the fact that resistance increases exponentially with speed. Personally, I have long marvelled at how much easier the first 50 in a 100 feels than an all out 50, even though the times (when you adjust for touching the wall with your feet in the first case, and your hand in the second case) is not terribly significant.
I am going fast and hard on my USRPT repeats, but not AFAP. That is why I believe, for me, in training for the 400, this is ideal and so far it works. I have said from the beginning that I don't know if I could do this training if I was training for the 100 or maybe even the 200.
For what it's worth, Glenn, Rushall told me that the difference between 100 percent effort and 95 percent effort is close to negligible because of the fact that resistance increases exponentially with speed. Personally, I have long marvelled at how much easier the first 50 in a 100 feels than an all out 50, even though the times (when you adjust for touching the wall with your feet in the first case, and your hand in the second case) is not terribly significant.
