Strength and Conditioning for Middle and Long Distance Athletes - Who Needs it?
Written by Di Huxley
The area of strength and conditioning has historically been lacking in the training programs of our potentially elite middle and long distance athletes. As a result, many of them are breaking down because they are not musculoskeletally strong enough to cope with high mileage or are burnt out because they are bored with training before they have a chance to achieve anywhere near their potential.
Today’s lifestyle means our athletes are driven everywhere, sit for long periods of time in front of electronic media, and perform much less manual work. Therefore, it seems more important than ever that we work harder on the area of strength and general conditioning, so when athletes increase the intensity and quantity of training in their late teens, their bodies are strong enough to cope with the workload. I believe the only way we as coaches can do this, is by having a systemic approach and program that is based very strongly around developing general strength and conditioning in our potentially elite juniors, before they embark on a full running program.
This means embracing and understanding all areas of strength and conditioning training. This belief involves a combination of more traditional forms, such as free weights, circuits, hills, and sand running, together with plyometrics, drills, and the use of Swiss and medicine balls.
In this article, I have tried to put together some reasons, evidence, and perhaps strong arguments for why it is essential to include strength and conditioning work in middle-distance and distance athletes' programs. The purpose is not to recommend a specific strength and conditioning program for such athletes, as this is the job of the individual coach. I tend to agree with Vern Gambetta when he says:
"I am not a proponent or opponent of any particular method of strength development. Rather, I am for a balanced approach in strength training and a better understanding of where it fits into the total conditioning and rehabilitation process."
I am not trying to prove a point nor come up with something new or original; my work is based on about four years of reading, learning, observing, asking questions, experimenting, and putting into practice what I have learned. All this has helped me understand the "bigger picture" in the development of an elite junior athlete through to a strong and successful senior athlete. Through this paper, I hope to show others what is involved in a strength and conditioning program and how being informed, open-minded, and knowledgeable about the subject will help the coach make an informed and rational decision about the strength and conditioning program required by each of their athletes.
I have divided this article into the following areas:
Strength training and the younger athlete
Who uses strength work and what most distance athletes are doing?
The link between strength and good technique
Is strength and endurance work compatible?
What type of strength training do athletes need or are doing?
Why is core strength and trunk stability so important?
Strength Training and the Younger Athlete
In the past, weight training and some other forms of resistance training have been thought of as unsafe for children. However, many scientific and medical professionals now think this was an overreaction. Furthermore, it was not consistent with the needs of children and did not reflect the actual risks involved in resistance training. Young athletes were being injured in youth sports activities, and it was obvious that their bodies were not able to meet the physical demands of the sports they were playing (Micheli, 1996). Resistance exercises can provide a potent tool to help reduce the severity of athletic injuries and possibly prevent them.
The National Strength and Conditioning Association, the American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine, and the American Academy of Pediatrics suggest that children can benefit from a properly prescribed and supervised resistance training program.
The major benefits are:
Increased muscular strength in both boys and girls without an increase in muscle bulk
Increased local muscular endurance
Prevention of injury in both training and competition
Improved performance capacity
Resistance training may increase bone mineral content and serve as a preventative measure against osteoporosis (this idea is behind the recent trend towards resistance training for older people, particularly post-menopausal women who are at a greater risk of low bone density)
Resistance training accelerates the establishment of coordination in maturing children. Its single most important benefit is the improvement of posture during growth spurts.
My experience with junior athletes over recent years, working in schools, Australian Squad camps, etc., is that the majority of these athletes have very poor posture and overall strength. Yet, we as coaches expect them to train hard, progress, and remain injury-free. Perhaps one of the reasons so many athletes have left the sport is because they are getting injured too often.
Of course, there are still restrictions on resistance programs for younger athletes, and anyone undertaking resistance work with their athletes needs to be well and suitably qualified. It is important that the strength program is progressive and developmental. For example, plyometrics should not be introduced to those with a training age of less than one year or to athletes who have not developed or stimulated major structural changes through a weight program. Below this age, they have not achieved the connective tissue adaptations to withstand such a tough training regime, nor will they have the strength base to cope with the demands of plyometrics.
Some coaches favor using a "strength coach" because they lack the time or knowledge to run the program. I am against the idea of the coach handing over their athletes to a "strength coach" to do this part of the program unless the two coaches work very closely together and have a very good understanding of the needs, abilities, strengths, and weaknesses of all athletes in the program. It is much preferable, at least at the junior level, for one coach to run the program. Of course, this is all easier said than done, as it requires the coach to have the time, money, and expertise to do this, as well as finding suitably priced gyms and pools with easy access. In major cities, this is a real problem. Many coaches I have spoken with about doing strength work all make the same comments: "I would love to do more or some gym and pool work, but facilities are too expensive for students, pool and gym space is not available, and the time involved in getting to and from the venues makes it very difficult."
Very little research into strength training and the younger athlete (or senior athletes, for that matter) has been done in Australia, but many European countries seem to see this as an important area of concern and research.
The following quote was taken from an article based on a translation from "Praxis der Körperkultur" and "Medizin und Sport" of the former German Democratic Republic:
"Opinions that weight training at a young age is responsible for serious damage, especially to the spine, still exist. However, these injuries appear to occur only when weight training is started before the age of 14 or when wrong methods are employed."
Fomin, Sukanov, and Munchov claim that studies of young weight lifters (15-17 years) indicate that the skeletal system adjusts itself to the additional loads without ill effects, provided the loading has been carefully and progressively increased during the growing age.
In the four years I have been coaching my athletes (ages 14-31) in the gym (which includes squats, cleans, jump squats, bench press, and plyometrics), I have not experienced injuries. On the contrary, I believe it has helped prevent injuries. Further to this, it appears from the Strength and Conditioning survey I conducted in 1998 that most Level II and III coaches in Australia using weights had not experienced major injury problems (if so, it was largely attributed to lack of supervision or starting too young).
Much of the literature on this subject recommends that the development of basic strength by using an all-round conditioning program (including resistance exercises against one's own body weight) be carried out between 10-14 years. How many Little Athletics coaches in Australia are doing this or have the knowledge and expertise to implement a strength and conditioning program? Perhaps instead of staging 800m and 1500m track races, we should conduct circuit/resistance-type activities as an event, as well as include a much greater emphasis on education in this area at OTC and Level 1 courses.
In an abbreviated article published by the Institute of Coaching, University of Tartu, Estonia, 1994, J. Loko, T. Sikkut, and R. Aule state that "research has shown that the best effect in the development of performance capabilities according to the selected aim is achieved when the natural growth is at its peak. The development of the desired physical capabilities during the phase of the most intensive growth leads to a significant increase in these capacities. For example, the best age to develop static strength occurs in boys between 14-15 years (23.4% increase) and in girls between 11-13 years (39.7% increase). To develop leg power, which is essential to the speed development of an 800m runner, the best age for boys is between 13-16 years and for girls 10-12 years. Perhaps we are missing the 'window of opportunity' if we in Australia are not doing strength training with our young athletes at this age."
In further support of this, strength and conditioning guru Vern Gambetta (in the 1990 edition of the NSA Round Table on the issue of Sport Pedagogy, with particular reference to the development of the younger athlete) states in answer to the question "Are there differences between the training of young boys and girls?"
"During the pre-pubescent years, there are virtually no differences. However, there are differences in the post-pubescent stage which need to be considered. Girls tend to reach a plateau in their physical ability, whereas boys tend to improve. This makes it imperative that girls begin strength training before puberty and continue this throughout their athletic careers."
Luis Miguel Landa, in his article "The Spanish Distance Running Training System," makes it quite clear that there have been shortcomings in the way young Spanish distance runners have been trained in the past:
"Because of the shortcomings of the physical education system in Spain, training young distance runners now includes the development of such neuromuscular capacities as coordination, agility, joint mobility, balance, speed, and strength."
He goes on to say that a lack of developed coordination and good joint mobility can increase the risk of injury and that "it has been clearly shown that athletes executing only pure endurance work produce poorer performances than those using a many-sided approach."
I believe there is sufficient evidence to support the need for a more serious approach to the development of strength and associated neuromuscular capacities in our junior distance athletes. And like the Spanish, perhaps we should make it a major component of coaching at the junior level.
Who Uses Strength and Conditioning Training?
When it comes to strength and conditioning training, opinions are divided. For every athlete and coach who swears by strength work, there are just as many successful athletes who don't include it in their programs. The debate over its place and value in the training of middle-distance and distance runners is ongoing. As coaches, it is our responsibility to learn about every facet of training available to our athletes and remain open-minded to the possibility that some, if not all, of our middle-distance and distance athletes may benefit from strength and conditioning work at various points in their careers.
No coach would argue that one of the greatest challenges of middle-distance running is achieving the correct balance between developing aerobic and anaerobic performance capacities. Strength training can play a significant role in developing balance, stabilization, joint proprioception, and kinesthetic awareness. If an athlete lacks muscular strength, they may rely more heavily on their anaerobic capacity, which reduces their overall work capacity and causes exhaustion to set in much earlier.
Sebastian Coe was a strong advocate for strength work, which was an integral part of his training. In their book "Better Training for Distance Runners," Coe and Martin state that due to the high mileage of accomplished distance runners (800m to marathon), significant imbalances can develop between stimulated and unstimulated muscles. For example, running alone strengthens the calves, hamstrings, and lower back, but does little for the quadriceps, abs, trunk, and upper body, potentially leading to injury. They argue that runners who incorporate strength and conditioning work have a significant advantage over others because:
a. They can handle higher intensity workloads more easily.
b. Stress on connective tissue is minimized, which can reduce joint injuries or overuse strains.
c. Connective tissue is also strengthened, making the entire support system more durable.
British marathoner Ian Thompson (1974 Commonwealth Games and European Marathon Champion) recognized the importance of an efficient running style and used free weights and body circuits to enhance it. He believed that strengthening the entire body, especially the upper body, was key to improving running style. He argued that resistance training, combined with interval training, could greatly enhance an athlete's ability to run smoothly and efficiently.
Australian coach Jack Pross also supports strength work for distance athletes. Influenced by Percy Cerutty, Pross advocates for weightlifting in his article "Long Distance Training in a Nutshell." He states:
"While most endurance and speed workouts have some effect on strength, the need for targeted strength development in distance running has been debated. However, none can deny that a stronger endurance runner has a decided advantage over a weaker opponent."
In the report of the XVIth Congress of the European Athletics Coaches Association: Endurance Running, Virumäki, Finland, January 18-20, 1990, several coaches discussed the use of strength training for endurance athletes:
Former world 10km record holder Arterio Barrios (27:08.23) included medicine ball exercises, bounding over 100 meters, and one free weight session per week (20-30kg, 3 sets of 6-10 reps).
Olga Bondarenko (1988 10km Olympic champion) uses strength training year-round, focusing on developing strength as a foundation for speed during the competition period. Her regimen includes free weights with reduced volume and high intensity, such as squats with loads more than twice her body weight of 41kg. This dispels the myth that weight training leads to "bulking up."
Tommy Boyle (UK), coach of Yvonne Murray (3km European Champion 1990) and Tom McKean (800m European Champion 1990), also advocates strength work. He combines free weights and circuit training to develop maximum strength, speed-strength, and good technique under endurance conditions. He also incorporates sprint training to improve technique, which may have contributed to Murray's "devastating kick from 600 out" in the 1990 European 3km Championship.
Enrico Dionisi (Italy) highlighted the importance of timed circuit work, hill running, and free weights in the success of Moroccan runners.
A. Polunin (USSR) emphasized the use of hills (both short and long), jumps, hops, free weights, body circuit exercises, and bounding to develop strength in long-distance runners.
Abrie de Swardt (Past National Coordinator of Middle and Long Distance Events in South Africa Athletic Union) also supports strength training for all middle- and long-distance runners, including hill work, circuits, free weights, Polish fartlek, resistance training (such as harness and tire pulling), and jumping exercises.
Closer to home, many of Australia's top middle-distance and distance runners use or wish they had placed more emphasis on strength and conditioning work. Steve Moneghetti has always included a weight session in his program, and in recent years has added Swiss ball exercises to improve pelvic stability, which he feels has deteriorated with age. His athlete, Lee Troop, also uses the Swiss ball, believing that if it's good enough for Moneghetti, it's good enough for him. Perhaps Moneghetti could encourage aspiring distance athletes to take core stability more seriously from the start.
Rob de Castella discovered strength work too late in his career and believes a strength and conditioning program would have enhanced his performance and helped reduce injuries. I introduced Pat Scammell to core stability work and drills during his comeback attempt for the KL games. The limited time spent on these exercises had a significant impact on his technique, and he too wished it had been a major part of his early training, as he felt he would have run faster by being more efficient and having fewer injuries as he aged.
These examples of coaches and athletes using strength work might encourage some of us in Australia to more carefully consider how we can incorporate this essential component into the programs of every middle- and long-distance athlete in the country.
The Link Between Strength and Good Technique
Some coaches may argue that their athletes are strong enough, and they might be right. However, these athletes could still lack the movement skills necessary to realize their full potential. Chris Falke, a former National Junior Event Coach, pointed out in an article that many top-level junior middle-distance (MD) runners lack the ability to increase their stride length and frequency, which in turn affects their speed. As a result, they struggle to respond to changes in pace during races or maintain their race pace when fatigue causes a loss of stride length.
While other factors such as aerobic and anaerobic fitness play a role in an athlete's performance, having good technique and movement skills is crucial and cannot be overlooked. Chris suggests that sprint races and drills should be part of all middle-distance and long-distance (MD/LD) programs. In my experience, very few distance athletes in this country include proper running drills in their training. There is often too much emphasis on building endurance, which leads to the neglect of quality movement components. Consequently, longer-distance athletes often exhibit significant deficiencies in running form, perpetuating the myth that a young athlete who is perceived as slow should move up in distance.
Good running technique is a skill that needs to be performed as efficiently and economically as possible for maximum performance. This is achieved gradually and progressively, which is why it should be a part of every developing MD/LD athlete's program.
Paul Garvey highlights the unique demands of cross-country running, where races on various terrains place special demands on coordination, strength, and speed. Athletes must adapt their stride to meet the course's demands, requiring good hip flexion for uphill runs, mobility for downhill strides, and ankle mobility for rough surfaces. Incorporating coordination, flexibility, and mobility drills into warm-ups or cool-downs, along with other forms of training, can improve performance and reduce the risk of injury.
Long-time AIS Physiotherapist Peter Stanton believes that to develop the best running technique for enhanced efficiency and performance, coaches must consider anatomical structure, strength, flexibility, posture, and motor control patterns. He acknowledges that some athletes possess sufficient strength and flexibility but lack intrinsic body awareness, such as knowing what pelvic stability feels like. As a result, they still exhibit poor running technique. Stanton recommends running drills as essential tools for teaching body awareness, particularly the sensation of having a "solid pelvis."
Other benefits of running drills include:
Developing a sense of muscular movements that can be applied to good technique in longer events as well as at high speeds.
Strengthening specific muscle groups, such as hip flexors and extensors, ankle flexors, and hamstrings.
Learning to use the glutes (postural muscles) rather than the hamstrings (work muscles) to initiate leg movements.
Improving coordination and accelerating the learning process of new motor skills, as well as using previously developed capabilities more efficiently.
Facilitating the development of an 'ideal' sprinting technique, which can enhance acceleration (an essential component of good MD running) and maximum speed.
Preventing injuries.
Adding variety to the training program.
Opponents of this type of work for MD/LD athletes often cite examples of successful runners with unorthodox techniques. For instance, Emil Zatopek was known for his excessive shoulder rotation, stiff and high-arm action, and strained neck and facial muscles. While good running style doesn't guarantee great performances, poor running style certainly detracts from potential. One might wonder how much faster Zatopek could have run with improved technique.
In "Training Distance Runners," Peter Coe and David Martin state that scientific studies have shown how the nervous system can adapt as running form changes. Sports commentators have described Sebastian Coe's running style as "poetry in motion." However, as a young runner, Coe had cramped, high-arm action and excessive shoulder movement. It took three years to correct these faults through a combination of strength training, flexibility exercises, and running drills.
Another criticism of adjusting technique is the time it takes to change an athlete's style. Peter Stanton also addressed this point at a conference in 1996, noting how difficult it was to correct the running technique of elite athletes. Correcting technique can sometimes cause an athlete to initially take a step back before improving. In a highly professional and competitive sport, this could mean reduced or no income for the athlete, prompting them to continue with faulty technique despite the risk of injuries.
When working with elite athletes, it's important to consider whether a coach should "tinker with success." Should changes be attempted in a runner who is already successful? The answer is probably yes, but any changes should be made cautiously, introduced gradually, and with the understanding that they may not yield the desired results. Ideally, specific assessments should be conducted to evaluate the potential impact of changes before they are implemented. It's also important to remember that various studies have shown there is no "ideal" running form.
A study by Dr. Peter Cavanaugh at the Centre for Locomotion Studies, Penn State University, found that:
"We could only degrade economy by 4% with arms held behind the back and by 4.6% when the subjects' vertical oscillation was dramatically increased. The results indicate that, although running economy can be negatively influenced by running style, the magnitude of the changes for such marked disruption of style is surprisingly low."
While this study might suggest that pursuing good technique is a waste of valuable running time, I would argue that, especially at the elite level, any gain, no matter how small, can translate to improved performance. As coaches, we should be open-minded about additional forms of training and address technique issues with developing athletes before it is too late.
Is Strength and Resistance Compatible?
While strength training is essential and undisputed in sprinting, jumping, and throwing disciplines, its relevance to running events—especially from 800 meters to marathon distances—is a contentious topic. Emphasis on specific strength training for these events has been moderate or, in some cases, nonexistent.
However, when you consider that distance running is a repetitive action, practiced perhaps more than any other activity in this sport, it seems logical that as coaches, we would want to strengthen our athletes to withstand the stress of carrying 3-8 times their body weight with each foot strike. The ability to handle this stress largely depends on maintaining a balance between strength and mechanical function.
The case for including strength work in a distance running program has not been helped by early researchers like Delorme (1945), Hettinger (1964), and Nett (1966), who concluded that "strength reduces stamina." Delorme assumed that muscular strength and muscular endurance were mutually exclusive, leading to the development of the strength/endurance continuum theory. This theory suggests strength is developed through high resistance and low repetitions, while endurance is built with low resistance and high repetitions. Although most literature still supports this theory, little to no unequivocal evidence based on statistical analysis exists, highlighting the need for more research in this area.
It’s also worth questioning why many middle-distance and distance athletes adhere to the endurance formula for strength work. Like Peter Lawler, I wonder why a distance athlete would focus on endurance in the gym rather than strength acquisition when all their other training is endurance-oriented. For example, Olympic walker Nick A'Hearn, after switching from an endurance-biased gym program to one focused on strength (higher resistance, lower reps based on one-rep max for chosen exercises), felt less tired and was better able to handle training and racing, particularly feeling stronger on hills.
Other research over the years has supported this shift in thinking, forming some of the traditionally held views on the subject. Strength and endurance training induce separate and distinct muscular adaptations due to their specific nature. Endurance training reduces glycolytic enzyme activity but increases intramuscular substrate stores, oxidative enzyme activities, and capillary and mitochondrial density. In contrast, strength training reduces mitochondria numbers and marginally impacts capillary density and metabolic enzyme activity while potentially reducing intramuscular substrate stores (except muscle glycogen). Both types of training, however, cause a common muscular adaptation where type IIb myofibers transform into type IIa myofibers. This transformation increases fiber size with resistance training and decreases it with endurance training. This has led to the view that endurance training facilitates aerobic processes, while strength training increases muscle strength and anaerobic power, making them seem incompatible.
However, a recent study titled "Impact of Resistance Training on Endurance Performance: A New Form of Cross Training?" by Tamaka and Swensen, published in Sports Medicine in March 1998, found that exercise performance data did not fit this accepted model. They discovered that resistance training, or adding resistance training to an ongoing endurance program, including running, increased both short- and long-term endurance capacity in sedentary and trained individuals. They believe these improvements might be linked to resistance training's capacity to alter myofibril size and contractile properties, which may, in turn, increase muscular force production.
Many distance athletes and coaches argue that resistance training produces the opposite of the desired physiological changes and violates the principle of training specificity—that is, programs should stimulate the athlete's mode of exercise.
As with all sports, distance running is becoming more competitive, and world records are moving further out of reach for Australian runners. Many coaches now believe that to succeed in endurance sports, athletes need more than enhanced long-term work capacity; they also require muscular strength and anaerobic power—abilities needed for hill running and tactical sprinting in races. To develop these capacities, many coaches now prescribe resistance training in conjunction with or in lieu of interval training.
The scientific literature is still not in agreement about the benefits of resistance training or its impact on endurance events. For example, it is often stated or implied in the resistance training literature that high-intensity, low-volume strength training does not induce the same degree of muscle hypertrophy as low- to moderate-intensity, high-volume work (Fleck and Kraemer, 1987; Stone and O'Bryant, 1987; Wathen, 1994; Zatsiorsky, 1995). However, a study conducted by Con Hivomallis, a PhD student in Melbourne, states: "The scientific evidence so far makes it impossible to state with any confidence which type of program will lead to greater muscle hypertrophy." This uncertainty and lack of concrete evidence can sometimes give coaches an excuse to deem strength training unnecessary for their athletes.
I see it as just another of the many challenges facing a good coach. It should be the coach's responsibility to gather as much information as possible to make an informed decision for each athlete. It is worth examining the physiological effects of resistance and strength training to understand how they might benefit middle- and long-distance athletes.
The effects of resistance training:
Induces muscle hypertrophy.
Causes little or no change in phosphagen, glycolytic, and oxidative enzymes.
At best, maintains muscle capillarization density, suggesting that oxygen diffusion distance and oxygen delivery remain at pre-training levels.
Greatly reduces mitochondria numbers, mainly due to hypertrophy-induced dilution.
Research differs regarding its effect on intramuscular phosphagens.
Increases myofiber size, leading to enhanced muscular strength, anaerobic power, short-term power output, and time to exhaustion at high-intensity submaximal work rates.
Interestingly, these increases after a period of resistance training did not result in any decrease in VO₂ max; it actually increased VO₂ max by less than 3% in untrained or moderately active participants. This was supported by another study published in the Journal of Applied Physiology (Vol 68, Issue 1, 1990), which showed VO₂ max increases of 8.3% when strength work was added to endurance work. While it is unwise to draw direct parallels with trained or elite athletes, it is worth considering.
The effects of endurance training:
Increases capillary and mitochondrial density, intramuscular substrate stores, and oxidative enzyme activity.
Reduces glycolytic enzyme activity.
Alters the size and ratio of type II fibers (increases type IIa and decreases type IIb).
Most research shows no change in the percentage or size of type I fibers.
Some data has shown type I fiber hypertrophy (only seen in untrained individuals, not in moderately to highly trained athletes). This again shows the dangers of coaches misinterpreting research and data.
Improves efficiency due to changes in myofiber and contractile properties.
Clearly, the physiological variables produced suggest that resistance and strength training could be synergistic. So, should endurance athletes do resistance training? I believe this decision is up to the individual and their coach and should be studied carefully before a decision is made.
Few studies have been conducted on the impact of resistance training on running performance. Perhaps this is why some coaches who coach from a "science" rather than an "art" perspective dismiss the potential benefits of resistance training for their distance runners.
Some studies on untrained participants showed that resistance training improved leg strength by about 25% and short-term treadmill performance by 10%, without accompanying increases in VO₂ max. Other studies with trained athletes have shown similar or greater increases in leg strength and up to a 15% improvement in vertical leap, indicating better anaerobic power and potentially better running performance. These studies found no change in VO₂ max in endurance-trained individuals, suggesting that if done correctly, strength training will enhance performance as the distance runner becomes more powerful but remains just as economical.
This improvement might occur due to the increase in myofiber size and its associated changes in myofiber contractile properties. If faster, larger, and stronger fibers generate more force, resistance-trained runners might be able to exercise longer at each absolute submaximal work rate by reducing the force contribution from each active myofiber or by using fewer of them. Additionally, in conjunction with stronger type I fibers, this might allow resistance-trained runners to delay the recruitment of the less efficient type II fibers.
The challenge, therefore, lies in finding the correct balance between aerobic work and strength development. The balance will depend on the event, and it's important to constantly monitor the athlete's endurance levels during strength training. A considerable drop in running speed at the anaerobic threshold level may suggest that the level of strength training is too high.
Like all parts of training, the strength program should be periodized and reflect the aims of the specific training phase. For example, general strength training designed to develop the athlete's major muscle groups would be the focus of a 10-12 week general preparation phase.
So, in answer to whether strength and resistance are compatible, there is no conclusive answer. However, I feel that in this country, we can't afford to ignore the possibility that resistance training might benefit middle- and long-distance performances rather than hinder them—can we really afford to give our competitors such a huge head start?
What Type of Strength Training Do Middle Distance Athletes Need?
Most coaches should have a solid understanding of the basic principles of strength work. Many would agree that muscular endurance is most crucial for longer distance athletes, while speed strength is essential for middle-distance athletes. Both groups aim for strength gains without significant hypertrophy, particularly in the longer events. However, maximal strength shouldn't be overlooked, as it's a foundational quality that influences both strength endurance and speed strength.
This article isn't about delving into the intricacies of various types of strength training or prescribing the "perfect" strength and conditioning program. Instead, it expands on some commonly used methods, emphasizing core strength and the best ways to develop it.
Common Forms of Strength Work for Middle Distance Athletes:
Isotonic Training: Involves fixed resistance with varying muscle speeds using free weights.
Isometric Training: Involves fixed static resistance without limb movement. While this method lacks the natural ballistic action required in distance running—which involves fast motion and repetitive, ballistic sequences of foot strike, mid support, takeoff, and swing—it plays a vital role in developing core strength.
Isokinetic Training: Utilises variable resistance machines to provide a velocity profile through a range of motion, which differs greatly from what is needed for running. These machines inhibit acceleration and are less functional since much of the strength gained isn't transferable to running.
Plyometrics: Involves concentric muscle contraction following an eccentric contraction. Examples include hopping, bounding, and depth jumping. Although more commonly used by sprinters and jumpers in this country, it's extensively utilized by middle-distance and distance athletes elsewhere. Plyometrics develops great elastic and functional strength without causing hypertrophy. Other advantages of plyometrics include:
Exercises can overload muscles at speeds closer to competition situations compared to traditional weight training.
Movements tend to be explosive, forcing the athlete to rapidly develop force and thereby improving power.
Training enhances the athlete's ability to utilize the elastic and neural benefits associated with the stretch-shortening cycle.
Circuit Training: Combines elements of strength work with endurance.
Sand and Water Running: Integrates mobility and strength work in a dynamic environment.
Hill Running: Offers specific strength training benefits.
Body Weight Resistance: Involves exercises like push-ups and chin-ups without additional weight.
Limitations of Fixed Weight Machines for Distance Athletes:
Many distance athletes favour fixed weight machines in the gym, but they must be aware of their limitations.
Linear exercise equipment that allows only uni-axial movement patterns from stable, fixed positions discourages the recruitment of synergists and stabilizers. While useful for initially strengthening an injured muscle, any gains need to be integrated into functional movement patterns later in the rehabilitation and development program.
"Distance running especially uses the thigh muscles more than the hip girdle muscles: doing resistive quadriceps and hamstring exercises while sitting on a machine only adds to the imbalance that the sport induces" (Shirley A. Sharman).
The Challenge of Strength Training for Athletes:
While the use of strength work to enhance athletic performance isn't new, traditional programs often don't consider the specific type and amount of strength required. This oversight occurs partly because it's easier to measure and develop strength gains than to develop skills like speed, timing, and balance, which come from more functional, specific strength training. The challenge for coaches is to create a strength program that trains integrated movements rather than isolated muscles, ensuring that the strength developed can be transferred to functional performance.
A Historical Perspective and Modern Application:
Strength training in long-distance running has a long history. It's well-known that distance athletes in the 1950s and 1960s extensively used strength work, recognizing its benefits for improving muscular power output, which in turn can reduce energy expenditure during running.
However, as with any training component, the strength program should be tailored to each athlete's needs and goals, considering the principle of individuality. For example:
Sprinters need power and focus on hypertrophy.
Middle-distance runners require significant strength and power with minimal muscle size increase.
Distance runners need overall joint strength and power without hypertrophy.
To develop an effective program, coaches need a solid understanding of muscle physiology to ensure the desired "selective hypertrophy" occurs.
Initial gains in strength from any weight program often result from improved neurological recruitment abilities, skeletal fiber adaptations, and increased exercise efficiency. Less experienced coaches may get carried away, neglecting to plan or understand that these gains plateau after a few months. For distance athletes, this plateauing isn't as problematic since hypertrophy isn't the primary goal. However, continuing the program maintains the training effect and helps prevent injuries to muscles and connective tissues.
Strength and conditioning training is often associated with weight training or a combination of traditional methods. However, an astute coach will recognize the importance of working on core strength in addition to these conventional methods. Some skeptics might dismiss this as a trend, considering medicine balls, Swiss balls, and Pilates as mere gimmicks of the fitness industry. However, Peter Stanton, a former AIS physiotherapist, would likely disagree. During his time at the AIS, Stanton conducted extensive research into the causes of injuries among middle-distance and distance athletes. His findings led him to hypothesize that "excessive movement around the pelvis causes injury."
Core Strength and Trunk Stability
The concept of "core strength" is now acknowledged as a crucial and essential aspect of training. It serves as a foundation for dynamic muscular development and maximizes the propulsive forces generated by the legs. All force generated by the upper and lower trunk musculature either originates, is stabilized, or is transferred through the trunk and lower torso. Therefore, if an athlete can maintain a strong and stable core, the forces generated by the legs will be more effectively directed forward.
Without adequate core strength, athletes are at a higher risk of injury. Additionally, during running, energy can be lost due to the twisting of the trunk region, which absorbs and wastes energy. For example, in the final stages of a 1500m race or longer, a lack of core strength may prevent an athlete from transmitting the necessary force to the track to accelerate their body. This is because torsional instability of the trunk absorbs the increased energy, reducing the force available to propel the runner toward the finish line in the most efficient manner.
Furthermore, a lack of isometric core strength can lead to a loss of postural control in the pelvic area, resulting in poor technique, inefficiency, and an increased risk of injury. Peter Stanton's studies at the AIS found that 50% of injuries originated from the pelvic area.
Coaches can often identify poor running technique but may not always understand the underlying cause or know how to correct the problem. Common examples of poor technique due to weak core strength and poor pelvic control include:
Excessive head movement
Flat-footed running or "sitting"
Asymmetry in stride
Crossing over of feet
Rounded shoulders
Overstriding
Excessive hip movement
Arms swinging across the body
Increased lordosis (sway back)
Many of these issues are related to incorrect pelvic positioning. Ideally, an athlete should aim for the following ranges in pelvic movement:
Anterior/Posterior Tilt: 4-7 degrees
Rotation: 5-15 degrees
Lateral Drop: 5-9 degrees
One athlete Peter Stanton worked with at the AIS was John Gladwin, a Commonwealth Games 1500m silver medallist who struggled with recurring hamstring injuries throughout his career. Stanton discovered that Gladwin had poor pelvic stability (40° rotation). When this was corrected through a proper strength, stretching, and technical routine, Gladwin experienced a 12-month period free of injuries.
Because the oblique abdominals help decelerate thoracic rotation, weak obliques may cause the arms to swing across the body in an attempt to compensate for a lack of core strength. In such cases, teaching the correct motor pattern for arm swing alone will not solve the problem.
An unacceptable anterior/posterior pelvic tilt can cause the weight line to be positioned too far behind the hip joint, leading to atrophy of the gluteal muscles. This issue is common among some distance athletes who then rely on their hamstrings, instead of their gluteal muscles, as the primary movers for hip extension. This compensation can result in severe strain on the hamstring muscle or its insertion, reduced stride length, and decreased power output due to weak gluteal muscles.
Some other issues that can arise from using muscles incorrectly due to pelvic instability include:
Quadriceps Shortening: Often occurs due to an anterior pelvic posture associated with weak abdominal and gluteal muscles.
Hamstring Overuse: Without sufficient gluteal strength, the hamstrings may become the primary hip extensors, potentially leading to hamstring irritation over time.
Recruitment of Longer Muscles: If stabilizing muscles are not functioning properly, longer muscles might be recruited to generate trunk movement. For example, if core muscles cannot control lateral hip drop within the normal range, the athlete may compensate by leaning side to side from the shoulders, causing an inefficient rolling action.
Muscle strength is not the only factor affecting trunk stability, and coaches should consider all factors to maximize their athletes' potential. These factors include:
Bony Structure: Cannot be changed; orthotics may provide a solution.
Muscle Imbalance: Usually requires intervention by a physiotherapist.
Poor Coordination: Can be addressed through technique drills.
Tight Muscles: Stretching should be as important as running in a training regimen.
Weak Muscles: Correct core strength exercises should be integrated into the middle-distance and distance program.
The purpose of this discussion is not to prescribe a detailed strength program for distance athletes but to emphasize the importance of addressing this area. Coaches should collaborate with physiotherapists and other qualified support staff to provide suitable programs for their athletes. However, I will offer a few suggestions on how best to develop pelvic stability.
It's not enough to merely strengthen muscles associated with pelvic control, such as the hip abductors, flexors, gluteus maximus, iliotibial band, iliopsoas, tensor fascia latae, abdominals (transverse and obliques), and hamstrings. Effective training requires the ability to use this strength to control movement patterns rather than just activating muscles. For instance, athletes may have well-developed rectus abdominals (a "six-pack") but use them to flatten their back instead of controlling pelvic movement, which can lead to reduced extension and cause the athlete to "sit" while running. Athletes who perform countless upper abdominal exercises without functional relevance might be wasting their time and would benefit more from learning to isolate, control, and strengthen their transverse abdominals.
Recent research by Hodges and Richardson demonstrated that the transversus abdominis muscle plays a crucial role in developing intra-abdominal pressure. Furthermore, it contracts with all trunk movements, regardless of the primary direction, and is recruited before all other abdominal muscles during sudden trunk movements.
The best way to strengthen the muscles associated with pelvic stability is by training them in the manner they are used in running. Since running involves isometric use of the stomach muscles, they should be strengthened in this way. This is where medicine balls, Swiss balls, and Pilates are appropriate, and why coaches should be open to incorporating these newer methods into their programs. It's worth noting that neither medicine balls nor Swiss balls are new. Medicine balls have been a staple in European training methods for decades, and Swiss balls were first introduced in the 1960s by Dr. Susan Klein-Vogelbach for functional rehabilitation. They were later adopted in the UK in the 1980s and in Australia in the early 1990s. The sports-specific applications of the Swiss ball include:
Stabilizing the trunk and limb girdle musculature.
Training postural/equilibrium reactions at controlled loads and speeds.
Replicating the functional requirements of combined stability and mobility.
Combining mobility and strength through a wide range of movements.
Allowing advanced progression using body weight and leverage.
Finally, a word of caution: developing strength in isolation from other components of the athlete's program can be counterproductive. Without an extensive stretching program alongside strength work, progress may not be optimal or even noticeable. As mentioned earlier, pelvic instability can result from various factors, and strengthening the associated muscles is only part of the training program. This must be done in conjunction with other components. Often, pelvic instability is due to shortened or overactive muscles in the pelvic region. To address this, restoring muscle length should be prioritized before strengthening activities. If strength becomes the primary focus before correcting muscle length issues, it may exacerbate muscle imbalances, dysfunctional recruitment patterns, and motor control problems (Sahrmann, 1993).
In conclusion, I do not claim to have all the answers. This arrticle represents the culmination of several years of learning and many more years of practical experience. From this, I have developed a strength and conditioning program tailored to the individual needs of my athletes. However, this program is constantly evolving as both the athletes and their coach continue to develop and expand their knowledge.