I saw this post in The Huddle last week and it got me to thinking....
Are we training properly for Ultimate? I mean, I don't think that 400s are really doing us any harm, but what could we be doing better?
I got me thinking about a few different things that we did at our practices that might fit the mold. 200s fit within that 30 second window for most people, but what if we changes those parameters to "30 second sprints" instead of 200 meter sprints? I know some of our team can hit 200s in just over 30 seconds, but most are closer to the 40-50 second range. We also did plenty of suicides when we had gym time. That seems to fit the mold a bit better. There is cutting, starting/stopping, and a little endurance worked in.
My final thoughts are that maybe we should be focusing on time ranges instead of distance ranges. What if we specified times and stuck to them by being vocal and using our coach to call them? A thought I had was to line everyone up on the goal line, have the coach start us, then make a call when we hit 15 seconds. At the 15 second point, players must stop as fast as they can, then turn and sprint the other direction. It simulates Ultimate in that you have to change direction when you're not expecting it, and it also keeps us within a given time range.
These are just a few thoughts I had on the matter, but it will really be interesting when more fitness professionals begin to look at the demands of the sport and really present us a better program to work from. As for me, I think injury prevention and bulletproofing your body would be a good start!
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I read that too. I think the article assumed a couple of things that I'm not sure apply in our case. The first assumption is the level of fitness. I believe there's got to be a base, even for short sprints and changes of direction. If you are only playing Ultimate and time-based sprinting do you have that base? I don't know that 400s are the answer, but time-based sprinting seems redundant. The second assumption is the length of the points. The difference in the time spent for elite players and for a small college team is I suspect rather large.
I agree with Dave about the length of points. Not having watched many elite-level games myself, I was surprised to hear that points were so consistently under 30 seconds. I'm not playing those games!
Do you have a regular time/weekly schedule that you work out (lift)? If so, I'd be interested in joining you 2-3 times per week, now that my summer schedule is starting to shape up.
I understand where you're coming from Dave, but whose job is it to build the base? Should we use a full year building a base for players that should be doing work on their own time?
Also, I don't think time-based is redundant if you adjust it for different things.... If it's consistently 15sec and 15sec, then yes, it gets redundant, but why not change it?
I only remember a few tournaments where the points were considerably longer, and that was in windy conditions where sprint speed is not really as much of a weapon. During those points it is nice to have some endurance, but I think speed endurance will carry over to a point.
I almost feel like the base we should be looking for is a strength base and not a endurance base though... Isn't Ultimate mostly anaerobic? It seems like we should prepare for that. I don't like CrossFit much, but I do agree with doing something similar to what the author suggests.
Post a Comment