Weyand Study/Locomotion Discussion

[Guest guest]

I hope that, in this third debate on the Weyand study, swing mechanics,

vertical and horizontal force, etc. we don't overlook the insights s

presented in his most recent post:

<<The Weyand camp need show nothing more than that to satisfy Dr.

Yessis's challenge to them to show a practical application of

Weyand's research. This issue should be considered well settled by

both sides.>>

I agree, and I believe I have done that. I highlighted three very specific

things I do in training based upon the implications of the study: Gravity

Constant and Gravity Constant Complexed, specific strength training (the Ross

protocol) , and specific bouts of speed based on individualized assessements of

each athlete's anaerboic speed reserve. Informatio9n on all three of these

protocols are available on Barry Ross's website, including charts, graphs,

video clips, analysis, and tables.

If we are looking for some sensible conclusion to this thread, I'd recommend

that these points be discussed by the parties involved in private

correspondences. I began this presentation back in September of '01 with a

private

post to Dr. Yessis. I have had numerous exchanges with Dr. Michalow, and the

majority of those have never reached the forum. Although he has an opinion on

horizontal force that is different from the way I interpret the findings, we

remain friends, and he is someone with whom I will continue to enjoy a good

dinner.

For members who take exception to those of us who consider the material

'groundbreaking,' I'd say that such a term implies a respect for the opinions

of

those who have spent a good portion of their careers on these issues. If

there wasn't such a level of respect for established experts, and an awareness

of their past contributions, such a term would not be appropriate. I do

believe that material which questions the contribution of swing mechanics at

top

speed is indeed groundbreaking--at least it is from my perspective, because it

has changed the way I train high school athletes. As noted, and

appears to have understood from my posts, " if working on limb speed and

technique

don't improve running performance, then the elimination of those types of

training is itself a practical application of Weyand's research. " And this

simply goes back to the original topic of the thread: Does sports science

research influence practice?

I also believe that there is great value in these kinds of open discussions,

but all parties, especially those have have points to argue instead of

perspectives to consider, need time to digest what's been said, or simply to

review the points and explore additional research. Instead of feeling

pressured

to explain or defend each position, maybe we should step back and simply say:

" We need to take a look at this.a little more closely. "

The last thing we need is to have forum members lose complete respect for

each other, and in the previous two rounds on these issues, our moderator

closed the thread before it got to that point. When both sides feel that are

making no headway, things just become heated, and we all run the risk of saying

things we might later regret.

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, Illinois