Author Topic: AGC's journal  (Read 522067 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Raptor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14619
  • Respect: +2539
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - raptorescu
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #780 on: November 08, 2013, 04:57:33 am »
0
It's easier to focus all your might into one overloaded jump (1 depth jump) than in consecutive jumps (I'm thinking jumps on the spot, vertically, that's what you mean, right? Like jumps to a backboard or something).

And like acole said, you know you always drop off from the same exact height so you can properly manage the load everytime.
Current PR status:

All time squat: 165 kg/Old age squat: 130 kg
All time deadlift: 184 kg/Old age deadlift: 140 kg
All time bench: 85 kg/Old age bench: 70kgx5reps
All time hip thrust (same as old age hip thrust): 160kgx5reps

vag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6059
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #781 on: November 08, 2013, 06:33:24 am »
+1
I guess that toddday has a case for people that get their best depth jumps out of low boxes. When box height is around the same with the bouncing height, it is more or less the same thing. I mean if you can get 20''-25'' on your consecutive jumps and the box you use for depth jumps is ~18'', then there shouldn't be much difference. But if your best depth jumps come from boxes in the 30'' area ( :o ) , then it would be rather hard to match those with consecutive jumps. Unless you can also get 30'' on consecutive jumps too. Even then, the whole absorb-the-landing-fast-and-jump sequence gets harder when droping from higher, so the focus raptor mentions above becomes more important. That is illustrated by the typical volume recommendations too. When using low boxes, volumes are high like in the consecutive jumps. When the box heights go up, the ground contacts are limited.

If this paragraph overdosed you with broscience, read this to get even: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/shockmethods.html
« Last Edit: November 08, 2013, 06:35:17 am by vag »
Target training paces (min/km), calculated from 5K PR 22:49 :
Easy run : 5:48
Tempo run : 4:50
VO2-max run :4:21
Speed form run : 4:02

---

it's the biggest trick in the run game.. go slow to go fast. it doesn't make sense until it smacks you in the face and you're like ....... wtf?

AGC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
  • Respect: +1207
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #782 on: November 09, 2013, 08:12:33 am »
0
Track:

Dynamic warmup/jog

5x40-50m sprints

5 broad jumps (all around 2.8-2.9m)

2x10 pogos/tucks

BW: 78kgs

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE</a>

My hams were really sore from DLs the other day. I didn't do longer sprints like I was planning but that's OK. I didn't film the sprints but they felt pretty good. Broad jumps came after the sprints so they weren't great, about 15cm off my best.

One negative is that I definitely felt my tib-fib joint hurting a bit during the sprints. I don;t think it's affecting my performance, it's just comes and goes. Sprinting definitely seems to be the activity which brings in on. It's miles better than a few weeks ago but it's just lingering longer than I thought it would. It's almost certainly linked to my weaker R ankle dorsiflexion from what I've been reading on it.

I guess I could cut out sprinting for a few weeks until it goes away but that would really suck right now. Long sprints are what I really want to do to improve my RVJ/100m in the next phase (as well as plenty of RVJing, of course), but I don't want this joint issue fucking everything up. I'm going to the physio again in a couple of days so will see what he says.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 08:44:37 am by acole14 »

AGC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
  • Respect: +1207
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #783 on: November 11, 2013, 08:28:26 pm »
0
Got a bit of a surprise when I went to the gym the day after last track session: it's closing again! Turns out the two guys who took it over got cold feet just before the handover was signed and legal. Really strange as they'd put up all these signs explaining all the new changes they were going to make and how awesome it was going to be. I guess someone gave them some good business advice: don't buy a failing gym in a competitive market! On the plus side, I was able to buy all the equipment I wanted. Too bad I can't set it up here but as soon as I have the space I'm gonna use it.

So, I have no gym now (they closed immediately), so kind of a bit lost atm. There's a few other gyms nearby but they suck: they're either Fitness First-style with joining fees, minimum 3 month direct debit contract bullshit, or they're just subpar gyms with no heavy equipment. There's one gym that's a straight-up bodybuilding/figure gym that I tried once but I could forget about doing SVJs and depth jumps there. I'd probably get kicked out lol. Or there's my old gym at Uni, but I hate that place. Arrghh. Need to have a think.

AGC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
  • Respect: +1207
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #784 on: November 14, 2013, 09:09:16 pm »
0
Gym:

Foam roll warmup/activation

Squat: warmup, 1x3@65kgs, 1x3@95kgs, 1x3@115kgs (slow eccentric, pause, fast concentric)

RDL: warmup, 1x5@40kgs, 1x3@75kgs, 1x3@115kgs (same as squats)

UB (bench with similar reps/speed as squats/RDL, pullups, DB shoulder), core

BW: 77.5kgs

I caved and went to the bodybuilding gym down the road. Forgotten how out of place I am in those sort of gyms. Luckily I'm pretty ripped at the moment and biceps are looking good, otherwise I would have felt really uncomfortable there. The first thing I heard when I walked into the change room was two roid monkeys talking and one of them said: "These motherfuckers nowadays will do all sorts of drugs. No fucking brains." Umm..OK nothing to see here.

I just did some activation/potentiation for tomorrow's comp. Gonna do the 100m/LJ again, and also thinking about doing the high jump. It's kind of something I've thought about training for for awhile now. I know actually improving at it is much more about technique that developing an awesome RVJ but that's certainly part of it. It would obviously help me get better at translating run-up speed into height off SL. Might talk to the coach and see what the training schedule is. Haven't done it in years but there's a separate <1.6m event for people who suck, so will give it a shot. I would do the shotput as well but it's not on this week.

AGC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
  • Respect: +1207
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #785 on: November 14, 2013, 10:26:51 pm »
0
Another note-worthy thing to log: finally moving closer to Uni in a few weeks, and the area I've landed in looks a lot more promising training-wise. I'm really close to the Uni track, and I found out that being in the athletics club means you can join the uni gym (where I used to go) for a much cheaper rate. Given I'm 10 mins walk away now as opposed to 40mins tram/train, I'll swallow my general dislike of the place and go there again to train normally.

Also, there is a Crossfit gym about 15mins away as well. STOP! I know what you're thinking, I'm not retarded: they have a separate olympic lifting club there where you can join for a month or two to get trained in the o-lifts. It looks pretty solid and they stress technique over lifting heavy for the sake of it. Might be interesting to join for a short time to get properly coached in the lifts. It's definitely something I should eventually progress in to continue the evolution of my training. It could be complete garbage but I'll just have to try it out. For $50 a month you can do 2-3 coached session a week:

http://crossfitunreal.typepad.com/crossfit-unreal/unreal-weightlifting-club.html

Lastly, I'm about 5 mins walk from this gym:



The gym itself sucks (no heavy weights, just cardio/machines) but it means I can find out when the court is generally free and do more proper jumping sessions again. So next year I could look something like:

Jan - April: sprinting/jumping/explosive gym stuff during season, more RVJs, try and get vert back to 2012 levels by end of season (37'')

Offseason: Deload, get trained in o-lift technique over 1-3 months (however long it takes), and continue training them myself once I've got them down, get really strong and boost standing vert to beast-like levels

Oct-Dec: back to sprints and jumps, become t-dub
 
Just potential ideas...could be a good year if everything works out.  :headbang:
« Last Edit: November 14, 2013, 10:28:33 pm by acole14 »

T0ddday

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Respect: +1115
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #786 on: November 15, 2013, 08:09:22 pm »
+1


<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE</a>


Maybe just me but that looks like the lowest broad jump I have seen.  I don't go that much farther than you but I jump much higher; you might try that I imagine there is quick diminishing returns to skidding across the ground like that.

TKXII

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • Respect: -12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #787 on: November 16, 2013, 10:53:03 am »
0
The point of depth jumps is to shock the muscles/tendons into absorbing forces greater than that would be achieved in regular jumping. This can only be achieved if you are dropping from a height greater than your rebound height, or your vertical jump. On page 20 of this document, the link to which can be found in a thread on the "Article & Video Discussion" section, a 2.5 foot drop was recommended in order to improve explosive capabilities of the muscle, and a 3.5 foot drop was recommended for improving maximal strength characteristics of the muscle. I haven't finished reading the whole thing yet, but the idea is that in one study they found that depth jumps increased maximal strength of the muscle, isometric and explosive strength.
http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Portals/0/Presentations/Shock%20Method%20Plyometrics.pdf

I'd also stop depth jumping on the mat. The mat is absorbing forces that your muscles and tendons are supposed to absorb in the exercise. The exercise is supposed to make you more elastic, meaning, you are training the restitution of energy in your muscle-tendon units. By having the mat absorb forces, you are training the muscles' contractile abilities in producing force more than you would without jumping on the mat. Similar to training in sand I'd bet.

"Performance during stretch-shortening cycle exercise is influenced by the visco-elastic properties of the muscle-tendon units. During stretching of an activated muscle, mechanical energy is absorbed in the tendon structures (tendon and aponeurosis) and this energy can subsequently be re-utilized if shortening of the muscle immediately follows the stretching. According to Biscotti (2000), 72% of the elastic energy restitution action comes from tendons, 28% - from contractile elements of muscles.

http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Portals/0/Presentations/Shock%20Method%20Plyometrics.pdf

Raptor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14619
  • Respect: +2539
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - raptorescu
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #788 on: November 16, 2013, 11:16:45 am »
+1
Back in the day it was believed that depth jumps do indeed do the stuff you're talking about. But recent research on the REAL plyometric ability and what that means refutes these claims.

There's nothing magical about depth jumps and the height of the jump. They're just a variation of a jump squat, except the fact that you're loaded on the excentric portion and unloaded on the concentric portion of the jump.

I can bring up these reasons as they're stated in VJB 2.0 if you want.
Current PR status:

All time squat: 165 kg/Old age squat: 130 kg
All time deadlift: 184 kg/Old age deadlift: 140 kg
All time bench: 85 kg/Old age bench: 70kgx5reps
All time hip thrust (same as old age hip thrust): 160kgx5reps

TKXII

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • Respect: -12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #789 on: November 16, 2013, 02:23:22 pm »
0
Yea I can believe that, could you bring up that evidence then?

One error I saw in the document I posted is the experiment they did with loaded depth jumps. They concluded that since athletes did not jump as high with a loaded depth jump it wasn't an effective exercise. Well we know that he ground reaction force will equal the mass of the athlete times gravity. The grf produced from a 3.5 drop landing can be matched with a loaded landing from a lesser drop in an infinite number of ways.

However on the concentric portion the question arises how the muscle-tendon unit differs in restitution the energy absorbed. Compare even further to a squat, I haven't seen research (haven't really looked though) examining how the energy restitution in the tendons differs from shock plyos, weighted plyos, and lifting
"Performance during stretch-shortening cycle exercise is influenced by the visco-elastic properties of the muscle-tendon units. During stretching of an activated muscle, mechanical energy is absorbed in the tendon structures (tendon and aponeurosis) and this energy can subsequently be re-utilized if shortening of the muscle immediately follows the stretching. According to Biscotti (2000), 72% of the elastic energy restitution action comes from tendons, 28% - from contractile elements of muscles.

http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Portals/0/Presentations/Shock%20Method%20Plyometrics.pdf

T0ddday

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Respect: +1115
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #790 on: November 16, 2013, 05:23:37 pm »
+1

One error I saw in the document I posted is the experiment they did with loaded depth jumps. They concluded that since athletes did not jump as high with a loaded depth jump it wasn't an effective exercise. Well we know that he ground reaction force will equal the mass of the athlete times gravity. The grf produced from a 3.5 drop landing can be matched with a loaded landing from a lesser drop in an infinite number of ways.


You are confusing absolute force with relative ground reaction force.   Read what you wrote.  If GRF = mass * gravity.... Then ground reaction force is the same no matter what because mass and gravity are constants....   When you are standing still (or on a scale) the normal force (GRF) is indeed mass * gravity, or your weight in pounds.   

The GRF we are interested in is the relative force during the landing (ie when you decelerate from x m/s to 0 m/s - after which GRF = ma again).   A force plate can approximate the instantaneous relative force during the landing but this of course depends on the manner of landing.   To calculate the average GRF during the landing you can use:    averageGRF = (mass * v )/ t  +  f  where v is landing speed and t is landing time.   

Now I'm rusty in physics but we do know that  distance = (1/2) * g * (t^2)   [ one half  A T squared ]  and that velocity = gt, so we can rearrange and get this formula :   V = sqrt ( 2 * d * g ) 

So take a 100 kg person and have them drop from 0.5 meters.    The velocity is 3.1 m/s.  If they drop from 1 meter it is 4.4 m/s.

So, the ground reaction force for the first and second case is 310/ t  + 980   and 440 / t + 980. 

Let's assume our athlete is quick and can jump up again in 0.3 seconds so and about half of that time is spent decelerating to zero, so a landing time of 0.15 seconds.

So our average GRF for each height is:  310/0.15 + 980 and 440/0.15 + 980 or 3046 N and 4109 N.   So the average ground reaction force is about 3 times bodyweight or 4 times bodyweight from the two heights if ground contact time is unchanged.

Now assume you only have a 0.5 meter box and you want to get the same GRF as the 1 meter box, so you strap weight onto your subject.

How much mass do we need to add?

I won't bore you solving it but rather say that:    ((100+35kg) * 3.1) / 0.15  + 135*9.8 = 4113 Newtons. 

So we have to add approximately 35 kilograms to our athlete to recreate the average GRF of a 1 meter drop with a 0.5 meter drop.   This is problematic because it might be hard to find a place to sufficiently load an athlete with 77 pounds where he can still have freedom of his limbs and movement AND because the athlete will almost surely not be able to jump up again in 0.15 seconds with 77 pounds of added weight. 

Now of course you can add more weight to compensate for the longer ground contacts but I believe the author is making the point that if ground contacts are much much longer the muscle will not be trained in the same weight.  Certainly could be so truth to that.   One interesting thing to do with these equations is play with force (gravity).  If you assume a nice band setup where you can manipulate force so you actually have gravity + bands you can probably maximize the training of the athlete to absorb force while maintaining small GCT.   








TKXII

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • Respect: -12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #791 on: November 16, 2013, 06:41:12 pm »
0
wow great response, my physics knowledge is elementary here.

So that's my question, how are the forces involved in  a loaded depth jump different than an unloaded depth jump when the GRFs are the same?

GRF 100kg athlete dropping from 1m GRF who takes 0.15s to decelerate from 4.4m/s =
440/0.15 + 981 = 3914N

So the exact mass the athlete would need to add to produce the same GRF from only a 0.5m drop:
v = 3.1m/s

rearranging grf= mv/t +ma
grf/(v/t +a) = m

you get 27.5kg the athlete would have to add. But my question is, would the time it takes for the athlete to decelerate be the same?

Then furthermore as you mentioned, the time it takes to produce force by the athlete would certainly be less, increasing ground contact time, but not necessarily deceleration time, the time used to measure the GRF.

edit: then another question is, is the GRF produced even important to consider in training for jumps?
How do quick depth jumps versus maximal height depth jumps differ in their GRFs?
I would think that quick depth jumps that emphasize minimal ground contact time would produce greater GRFs upon landing than depth jumps form the same height involving jumping as high as possible, but then how would the muscle-tendon unit be trained differently form those two types of jumps? Would there be any benefit to using a speed depth jump when it results in shorter jump height?


« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 06:44:25 pm by Avishek »
"Performance during stretch-shortening cycle exercise is influenced by the visco-elastic properties of the muscle-tendon units. During stretching of an activated muscle, mechanical energy is absorbed in the tendon structures (tendon and aponeurosis) and this energy can subsequently be re-utilized if shortening of the muscle immediately follows the stretching. According to Biscotti (2000), 72% of the elastic energy restitution action comes from tendons, 28% - from contractile elements of muscles.

http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Portals/0/Presentations/Shock%20Method%20Plyometrics.pdf

Raptor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14619
  • Respect: +2539
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - raptorescu
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #792 on: November 16, 2013, 07:43:49 pm »
0
Yea I can believe that, could you bring up that evidence then?

One error I saw in the document I posted is the experiment they did with loaded depth jumps. They concluded that since athletes did not jump as high with a loaded depth jump it wasn't an effective exercise. Well we know that he ground reaction force will equal the mass of the athlete times gravity. The grf produced from a 3.5 drop landing can be matched with a loaded landing from a lesser drop in an infinite number of ways.

However on the concentric portion the question arises how the muscle-tendon unit differs in restitution the energy absorbed. Compare even further to a squat, I haven't seen research (haven't really looked though) examining how the energy restitution in the tendons differs from shock plyos, weighted plyos, and lifting

http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/plyomyths.html
Current PR status:

All time squat: 165 kg/Old age squat: 130 kg
All time deadlift: 184 kg/Old age deadlift: 140 kg
All time bench: 85 kg/Old age bench: 70kgx5reps
All time hip thrust (same as old age hip thrust): 160kgx5reps

AGC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
  • Respect: +1207
    • View Profile
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #793 on: November 16, 2013, 08:35:43 pm »
0


<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdh2MCVwvGE</a>


Maybe just me but that looks like the lowest broad jump I have seen.  I don't go that much farther than you but I jump much higher; you might try that I imagine there is quick diminishing returns to skidding across the ground like that.

I love it when you haven't checked your journal in a couple of days and you find it's exploded with posts haha. Hmm, I've always been told to try and keep an even lower angle than mine, around thirty degrees. But I've also read other sources that say 45deg. I've found in the past from experimenting that I jump further with a lower angle, but maybe I should try practising more with more height and see what happens.

This paper breaks down the broad jump pretty well, it advocates a take-off angle of 19-27deg, with a forward lean angle (not the take-off angle, which is angle of the midpoint/velocity angle...I think) at around 45deg:



The test subjects weren't exactly elite athletes (avg broad jump of ~2.2m), but it's still an interesting read.

TKXII

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1255
  • Respect: -12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: acole14's journal - DUNK OR DIE
« Reply #794 on: November 16, 2013, 08:44:12 pm »
0
Yea I can believe that, could you bring up that evidence then?

One error I saw in the document I posted is the experiment they did with loaded depth jumps. They concluded that since athletes did not jump as high with a loaded depth jump it wasn't an effective exercise. Well we know that he ground reaction force will equal the mass of the athlete times gravity. The grf produced from a 3.5 drop landing can be matched with a loaded landing from a lesser drop in an infinite number of ways.

However on the concentric portion the question arises how the muscle-tendon unit differs in restitution the energy absorbed. Compare even further to a squat, I haven't seen research (haven't really looked though) examining how the energy restitution in the tendons differs from shock plyos, weighted plyos, and lifting

http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/plyomyths.html

haha yea I also like it when I get more posts on my journal.

anyway raptor, I think horsepower is also a myth. I haven't trained anyone consistently for vertical jump so I can't say what works for most people, but I'm willing to accept that for most people building horsepower works, but from my experience that is too simple to be close to the truth on the matter.

I'll move the physics stuff to another thread.
"Performance during stretch-shortening cycle exercise is influenced by the visco-elastic properties of the muscle-tendon units. During stretching of an activated muscle, mechanical energy is absorbed in the tendon structures (tendon and aponeurosis) and this energy can subsequently be re-utilized if shortening of the muscle immediately follows the stretching. According to Biscotti (2000), 72% of the elastic energy restitution action comes from tendons, 28% - from contractile elements of muscles.

http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Portals/0/Presentations/Shock%20Method%20Plyometrics.pdf