Is Speed Training Worth the investment: A conversation

[Myherobobhope]

13 hours ago, BombinJim said:

Wow swing weight must be like Z4!

They aren’t that bad… ping does an exceptional job with custom clubs like that.

[Myherobobhope]

14 hours ago, milesgiles said:

cant help but notice all the different 'speed systems' (4 that I know of but probably far more) have their own threads..

 

Im not allowed to post in them, but my goodness those guys are tying themselves in knots, debating which system is best..

 

There is still no evidence that any of them work, so the idea that one is better than the next is completely subjective. Did read that someone with the app is regressing but the app isnt taking any notice and not changing the protocol..

 

Im definitely stalling out in my own quest. Im going to twice a week instead of three times now, with a lot of one handed swings. This is all just with an old driver. When that stalls, Im keen on trying swinging from my knees, although Im going to get some very odd looks..

I haven’t actually looked at other systems protocols, but im willing to blindly argue that the stack is the best… it doesn’t update protocols as you go through each program, it just suggests different programs to use (I think)… interestingly today I hit 106 with the 195g weights and couldn’t beat that speed with 125g of weight. Found it interesting..

 

we all plateau eventually… otherwise there would be a long drive guy out there breaking the sound barrier.

 

though I’ll be interested to see if you can break your plateau and how you do it… adding / subtracting 20g from the head you are using should put you in the under speed and over speed “windows” most of these products aim for.

 

and hey, I started this thread for you! I like the conversation about whether the aids are worth the money. 
 

my conclusion is the scheduling for the app and the set protocols that I trust make me do it more than I would on my own. 
 

Is that worth $350? It’s possible! 
 

also, the shorter stick makes it easier for me to train indoors… 

[Seamus_McDuff]

35 minutes ago, Myherobobhope said:

 

 

also, the shorter stick makes it easier for me to train indoors… 

I have four “Full Speed Spectrum” sessions to go. Not sure what I’m going to do for the “Progress Check” after when I’ll have to swing my driver, which I can’t do indoors, and it’s 15 degrees outside. 

[Myherobobhope]

9 hours ago, Seamus_McDuff said:

I have four “Full Speed Spectrum” sessions to go. Not sure what I’m going to do for the “Progress Check” after when I’ll have to swing my driver, which I can’t do indoors, and it’s 15 degrees outside. 

Yeah. I did my work outside in 40 degree weather yesterday... Did not enjoy it! I think it's like 10 full driver swings? so it won't be TOO much time outside. Just have to move everything inside when you are done... I wonder if snow messes up the PRGR.

[hammersia]

On 1/5/2022 at 2:12 PM, milesgiles said:

 

Im definitely stalling out in my own quest. Im going to twice a week instead of three times now, with a lot of one handed swings. This is all just with an old driver. When that stalls, Im keen on trying swinging from my knees, although Im going to get some very odd looks..

I think you should give the Speed Stix a try 

[milesgiles]

On 12/31/2021 at 5:54 PM, SirFuego said:

Something I've been wondering....

 

Has anyone experimented with "submaximal" speed training?

 

In other words, rather than going 100% with every swing during whatever speed protocol you use, have you experimented with hitting goals that are below your theoretical max, but faster than your regular swing?  So let's say you can hit 130mph with 100% effort, but your typical swing is 110mph, you would try to stay within, say, 120-125mph in your training?  The 120-125 range is purely arbitrary for the sake of this example -- I suppose it could be 115-120 or anything else in between 110 and 130.

 

There are theories in the strength training world, particularly in regards to athletic training as opposed to pure strength/hypertrophy (like bodybuilding or powerlifting) that you don't need to lift to failure.  In fact, you can train with consistently leaving 1-2 reps in the tank for each set of a big compound lift (squat, bench, deadlift, press, and row) and still get stronger -- even increase the maximum weight you can lift should you try to eventually max out.  The major reasons for doing this is that you can do more "quality" work without fatiguing your nervous system as much.  As such, you can theoretically increase volume (more "heavy" repetitions) and/or frequency (how often you lift).  The workouts are possibly "easier" because you aren't grinding out reps in every workout.

 

So the question I have is can something similar apply to speed training?  If you do submaximal speed training, your nervous system is theoretically going to be less fatigued, and therefore recover faster.  As such you may be able to train for speed more frequently (e.g. every day or 5-6 days/week) and/or accumulate more volume (more "fast" swings).  You are still training faster than normal speeds, but you also aren't pushing your body to the max of what it is capable (making you less prone to injury?).

 

To stress, I have no experience with it, and have not seen anything to support or deny this, but since both speed training and strength training fatigue the nervous system, it makes me wonder if similar concepts can be applied to speed training.

 

ive wondered similar, but I doubt the type of hand held units we all use is accurate enough, even if I could swing within a couple of miles an hour of an arbritrary sub maximal target. I also doubt speed training is intense enough anyway to justify this sort of cycling effort.

 

I don't rule it out as something I might try down the line. Im sure there is stuff we can learn from weight training that could apply. I just put an extra day of rest in between my sessions, and had a good response today speed wise. 

[SirFuego]

45 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

ive wondered similar, but I doubt the type of hand held units we all use is accurate enough, even if I could swing within a couple of miles an hour of an arbritrary sub maximal target. I also doubt speed training is intense enough anyway to justify this sort of cycling effort.

 

I don't rule it out as something I might try down the line. Im sure there is stuff we can learn from weight training that could apply. I just put an extra day of rest in between my sessions, and had a good response today speed wise. 

The more I think about the idea, the more I talk myself out of submaximal speed training as being a reasonable option.  My original line of reasoning was to possibly use it as a means to overcome plateaus and/or for someone to gain speed while their body might not be able to handle swinging as fast as they can (let's face it -- a lot of golfers aren't in peak athletic shape).

 

However, I don't really see those as good reasons:

• As you said, accuracy of handheld radars are suspect for individual swings.  They are sufficient for seeing trends across multiple swings, but trying to target a specific number probably isn't a good way to use those devices.
• Overcoming plateaus in strength training is often accomplished by simply changing the stimulus, rather than just trying to power through the plateau doing the same thing you've always been.  This is also perhaps where the "what is the best type of speed training" questions start to break down -- if you are plateauing, the best type of speed training is probably the type that you aren't doing.  That said, another way to break through plateaus is to simply increase volume.  This can be accomplished either through higher frequency (more workouts per week) or more sets/reps in a given workout.  Submaximal speed training might allow for higher frequency/volume (at the expense of some intensity) -- but at the same time, I don't know if higher frequency/volume would actually translate to more speed gains.
• If you aren't in good enough shape to handle maximal speed training, submaximal speed training might gain you a few mph without injuring yourself, but you'll be stuck there until you hit the gym and get in better shape.  If you are an untrained person, simply spending time in the gym getting in better shape likely will gain you more swing speed anyways.  Yes, at some point the rate of speed gains will do down and you might even lose that speed you gained if you don't do anything to maintain it (despite getting stronger).  However, when you do start speed training up again, you are in a much better position to maximally train for speed with a smaller chance of injury.

 

Submaximal speed training might be useful in-season as a way to maintain speed?

 

Maybe it could also be used as a "recovery" session in conjunction with regular speed training as a way to increase volume of "faster than normal swings"?

 

Take everything I said with a grain of salt as I'm just speculating.

Edited January 7, 2022 by SirFuego

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, hammersia said:

I think you should give the Speed Stix a try 

 

I try to be open minded. I have not, and will not say overspeed is rubbish. When Ive exhausted all other options, I will borrow a light one and proceed with caution. Leaping straight into any variation of these speed sticks without trying anything else first is a poor idea 

[milesgiles]

whilst Im not allowed to post in them I do read the other overspeed  threads and there does seem to be a clear pattern.

 

If youve never done any speed training, then a concentrated effort should get you about 10mph/25 yards in 2-3 months. That seems to be true however you train, ie 'overspeed' (light sticks) or just an old club.

 

As far as Ive read, its also doesnt matter what speed you were starting from, or even what age you are. 

 

Now, Im certainly going to carry on, but can you get beyond that initial 10mph gain? It doesnt sound like many here have..

[J.Bex]

8 hours ago, milesgiles said:

whilst Im not allowed to post in them I do read the other overspeed  threads and there does seem to be a clear pattern.

 

If youve never done any speed training, then a concentrated effort should get you about 10mph/25 yards in 2-3 months. That seems to be true however you train, ie 'overspeed' (light sticks) or just an old club.

 

As far as Ive read, its also doesnt matter what speed you were starting from, or even what age you are. 

 

Now, Im certainly going to carry on, but can you get beyond that initial 10mph gain? It doesnt sound like many here have..

I agree, and posted earlier that it's like "beginner gains" in the gym - gains will happen once that concentrated effort truly starts regardless of program.  I hear your questioning, and think it's good to question things and have the debate/conversation if its constructive.  Trying to be constructive in this post.

 

As much as the the sports community promotes speed training, it seems the scientific side simply needs more research to backup the evidence.  Not sure if any researchers actually published golf specific studies, like TPI findings, just the articles we see including Chris Finn's.  Best we can do is keep open minded and try things for ourselves. 

 

I find the comments related to the gym interesting like @SirFuego mentioned about submax training.  A few things related....

 

Gym rats might've heard the term "Grease the Groove" (GTG) credited to Pavel T.  Basically it's doing a few reps of an exercise - like pullups - often throughout the day to practice the movement and ingrain it, so that in theory on a neuromuscular connection/recruiting level you're more efficient and can potentially lift more with good form.  "Practicing strength" like practicing an instrument.  Something to be said about swinging a club often as "GTG", or even swinging without a club.

 

Also I posted a thread on fast twitch in athletes, below.  The researcher Dr. Galpin says there's just not much on fast athletes.  He believes the evidence suggests that to increase type 2 fast twitch muscle fibers, to your genetic potential, it's best to lift heavy for overload and train with max explosive movements, as muscle fibers can change.  I guess the argument can be made:  Why not train for faster muscle contractions with overspeed done safely, if that perhaps heightens neuromuscular connection?  Helping ingrain the movement or getting us used to those fast contractions. 

 

Another area somewhat related is PAP - post activation potentiation, and PAPE - post activation performance enhancement.  Trainers may talk about muscle potentiation but can really mean PAPE.  From my understanding, basically performing lifts or high isometric or dynamic muscle contractions prior to a movement like a max jump, stimulating muscle contraction, again neuromuscular, and enhancing performance of that movement.  Here are a couple publishings that go deep into the body mechanisms:

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0

 

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/4/386#ref-9

 

Hope this gives more insight.  If anything it seems signs point to encouraging overspeed training, but the scientific community need more research.

[Nels55]

12 minutes ago, joostin said:

I agree, and posted earlier that it's like "beginner gains" in the gym - gains will happen once that concentrated effort truly starts regardless of program.  I hear your questioning, and think it's good to question things and have the debate/conversation if its constructive.  Trying to be constructive in this post.

 

As much as the the sports community promotes speed training, it seems the scientific side simply needs more research to backup the evidence.  Not sure if any researchers actually published golf specific studies, like TPI findings, just the articles we see including Chris Finn's.  Best we can do is keep open minded and try things for ourselves. 

 

I find the comments related to the gym interesting like @SirFuego mentioned about submax training.  A few things related....

 

Gym rats might've heard the term "Grease the Groove" (GTG) credited to Pavel T.  Basically it's doing a few reps of an exercise - like pullups - often throughout the day to practice the movement and ingrain it, so that in theory on a neuromuscular connection/recruiting level you're more efficient and can potentially lift more with good form.  "Practicing strength" like practicing an instrument.  Something to be said about swinging a club often as "GTG", or even swinging without a club.

 

Also I posted a thread on fast twitch in athletes, below.  The researcher Dr. Galpin says there's just not much on fast athletes.  He believes the evidence suggests that to increase type 2 fast twitch muscle fibers, to your genetic potential, it's best to lift heavy for overload and train with max explosive movements, as muscle fibers can change.  I guess the argument can be made:  Why not train for faster muscle contractions with overspeed done safely, if that perhaps heightens neuromuscular connection?  Helping ingrain the movement or getting us used to those fast contractions. 

 

Another area somewhat related is PAP - post activation potentiation, and PAPE - post activation performance enhancement.  Trainers may talk about muscle potentiation but can really mean PAPE.  From my understanding, basically performing lifts or high isometric or dynamic muscle contractions prior to a movement like a max jump, stimulating muscle contraction, again neuromuscular, and enhancing performance of that movement.  Here are a couple publishings that go deep into the body mechanisms:

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01300-0

 

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/4/386#ref-9

 

Hope this gives more insight.  If anything it seems signs point to encouraging overspeed training, but the scientific community need more research.

 

It seems that the question is whether or not it is worth continuing serious overspeed training after the initial gains have been accomplished? 

 

For me at age 66 I don't believe that there is any reason to do anything but a few sessions a week to try to maintain the gains that I made many years ago when I first started overspeed training.  LOL I first trained for speed using an overweight training club which was a wooden handled mop.  Looking back I believe that may have worked as well as anything else I have tried including my homemade speed sticks and a number of other lighter clubs along with a couple of speed chains that I fabricated over the last 20 years or so.  Right now I am mostly using a swing fan which seems to be giving me equal or maybe better results then the speed sticks.  I also swing a splitting maul to try to increase over strength.

 

I have very recently been working on the rope and step drills from the Dr. Kwan videos which seem to have produced a bit of a speed breakthrough for me.  This looks to be usable speed which is a good thing.

[Trap Junior]

I studied a bit of this in physiology.  People are born with varying amounts of fast twitch and slow twitch muscles.  There is a 3rd kind which is intermediate.

 

You cant increase fast twitch muscle amounts.  You can train slow twitch to be intermediate twitch but not to fast twitch is what I learned.

 

A marathon runner and sprinter have different muscle types an one cant become the other.

 

So my take is that if you are slow twitch you will struggle to get faster where as a fast twitch person has potential to gain lots of speed.

 

I'm no expert but the only way imo a slow twitch person will hit the ball a long way is through size and brute force.  A big stocky build for example.

 

Feel free to correct  me if I am wrong.

 

[Nels55]

4 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

I studied a bit of this in physiology.  People are born with varying amounts of fast twitch and slow twitch muscles.  There is a 3rd kind which is intermediate.

 

You cant increase fast twitch muscle amounts.  You can train slow twitch to be intermediate twitch but not to fast twitch is what I learned.

 

A marathon runner and sprinter have different muscle types an one cant become the other.

 

So my take is that if you are slow twitch you will struggle to get faster where as a fast twitch person has potential to gain lots of speed.

 

I'm no expert but the only way imo a slow twitch person will hit the ball a long way is through size and brute force.  A big stocky build for example.

 

Feel free to correct  me if I am wrong.

 

This sounds correct according to what I have heard in the past anyway.  I have also heard that fast twitch muscles are only recruited during intense max effort exertions which means that fast twitch muscles are not used in a normal golf swing.  I have no idea if this is true or not but I have heard it vehemently promoted as fact.

 

 

[BombinJim]

2 hours ago, Trap Junior said:

 

I studied a bit of this in physiology.  People are born with varying amounts of fast twitch and slow twitch muscles.  There is a 3rd kind which is intermediate.

 

You cant increase fast twitch muscle amounts.  You can train slow twitch to be intermediate twitch but not to fast twitch is what I learned.

 

A marathon runner and sprinter have different muscle types an one cant become the other.

 

So my take is that if you are slow twitch you will struggle to get faster where as a fast twitch person has potential to gain lots of speed.

 

I'm no expert but the only way imo a slow twitch person will hit the ball a long way is through size and brute force.  A big stocky build for example.

 

Feel free to correct  me if I am wrong.

 

I’m not sure this is 100% correct, although genetics probably does limit the extent of body adaptations. For the majority of my life I was a competitive swimmer (distance events) and later an ironman triathlete but had years where I focused on strength/power lifting (still at it today). I think ones body tends to adapt to the stimuli you subject it to. If you train for explosiveness, the body will adapt IMO.

[phizzy30]

8 hours ago, Trap Junior said:

I studied a bit of this in physiology.  People are born with varying amounts of fast twitch and slow twitch muscles.  There is a 3rd kind which is intermediate.

 

You cant increase fast twitch muscle amounts.  You can train slow twitch to be intermediate twitch but not to fast twitch is what I learned.

 

A marathon runner and sprinter have different muscle types an one cant become the other.

 

So my take is that if you are slow twitch you will struggle to get faster where as a fast twitch person has potential to gain lots of speed.

 

I'm no expert but the only way imo a slow twitch person will hit the ball a long way is through size and brute force.  A big stocky build for example.

 

Feel free to correct  me if I am wrong.

 

It is highly unlikely that a person with more slow twitch fibers will ever reach the max ss of the person who's naturally born with more fast twitch provided that they train the same way.  Brute strength and size can only take you so far.  Look at Ryan Steenberg for example.  The man is huge but he's still just a hair slower than Kyle Berkshire.  Kyle's no bean pole but he's not nearly as massive as Ryan.  If I had to guess, Kyle has more fast twitch fibers to begin with.  The WLD guys all train very similarly.  I will also use myself as an example.  I'm only 5'7, but when I was swinging 122 mph average in my late 20's, I also weighed 185.  Given my bodybuliding backround, I was already pretty big and strong, but not fast.  I really focused on speed training in my mid 20's to see what it would do for golf.  Went from 110 to 128 mph max in 2 years after adding plyometrics and over speed training. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by phizzy30

[SirFuego]

A few more thoughts on overspeed training.  Again these are all thoughts with no evidence, but stuff to possibly think about, especially if you are struggling with a plateau.

 

There are a number of people who feel that "heavy is slow" when it comes to speed training.  In other words, training with a heavy stick (e.g. the red superspeed stick) can be detrimental to speed.  I used to be in this camp, but I'm starting to rethink this.  A few years ago, Superspeed made a claim that, on average, people will swing the green stick 19% faster than their typical driver swing, blue stick 15% faster, and red stick 10% faster.  Of course, I take anything from Superspeed (or any company that is trying to sell a product) with a grain of salt, but I will say that those numbers are not much different from my own experience swinging Superspeed sticks.  I posted a reference chart in another thread a few years ago.

 

So taking that into account, you are still swinging faster with the heavy stick than your typical driver swing.  In other words, you are still training "faster than normal" and possibly still giving yourself a "positive" stimulus when it comes to building speed.  That said, even if this is true, that doesn't necessarily go against the "heavy is slow" crowd, because at some point if you make things heavy enough, you won't be able to swing that faster than a driver and it could negatively impact speed.

 

That said, one other thing to keep in mind is that tension also kills speed.  I've been reading Triphasic Training by Cal Dietz recently and one study that he references is that elite athletes don't necessarily fire their agonist muscles (primary movers) faster or stronger than non-elite athletes, but rather they relax their antagonist muscles significantly faster than non-elite athletes.  I experimented with warming up on my superspeed protocols with an orange whip knockoff (that is significantly heavier than a driver).  One thing I found is that it seemed to improve my tempo and when I would translate that tempo to swinging superspeed sticks -- really good things would happen in terms of speed.  So using a heavy implement could be useful if you focus on tempo while using it.  I know that I tend to perhaps get a bit too much tension when swinging the green stick, so perhaps a larger focus on tempo during my training can increase my speed as it improves my ability to relax muscles.

 

Another interesting thing I was reading in Triphasic Training is that each workout should have a primary focus, as opposed to trying to mix strategies together.  For example, mixing hypertrophy (lower intensity, high volume) and strength (high intensity, low volume) within the same workout can send "mixed" signals to the brain (at least for trained individuals).   If you were to separate those strategies into different workouts, the body can dedicate adaptations to each stimulus independently.  Assuming this same idealogy applies to speed training -- that leads the question of does the stimulus from the heavy stick differ enough from that of the green stick that they should be trained on different days (perhaps with different volumes).  In other words, are we sending "mixed" signals to the CNS when we progress between green, blue, and red sticks within a single session?  Or should we split up training such that we focus our efforts onto a single weight (e.g. Monday is "green day", Wed is "blue day", Friday is "red day" -- or any order thereof).

 

Additionally for those who advocate "low volume" training with just the blue stick -- is that really the best way?  Or would you be better off doing that same session, but changing the weight of the stick each day you train?

 

Again, no idea if any of this matters enough, and the principles mentioned here probably only apply to "trained" folks anyways seeing as "untrained" folks can pretty much adapt to any stimulus pretty quickly.  So just some things to ponder if you get to the point that you just can't seem to put on any more speed.

Edited January 15, 2022 by SirFuego

[Trap Junior]

2 hours ago, BombinJim said:

I’m not sure this is 100% correct, although genetics probably does limit the extent of body adaptations. For the majority of my life I was a competitive swimmer (distance events) and later an ironman triathlete but had years where I focused on strength/power lifting (still at it today). I think ones body tends to adapt to the stimuli you subject it to. If you train for explosiveness, the body will adapt IMO.

The body will adapt but one guy with slow twich can only convert his slow twitch to intermediate fibres so they will get faster but not turn into fast twitch muscle fibres so they have a ceiling that a person with higher percentage of fast twitch fibres doesnt have.

 

The only way to know is biopsy of muscle tissue. 

 

Me for example I was always a slow sprinter and always finished down near the last in sprinting competitions in school.  I was never strong either.  I would tend to lose arm wrestling to average kids.  I dont look weak or fat but I perform that way.

 

I played golf to a high level but never had the swingspeed to get to the next level.  I am somewhere i the 105-112mph range depending on how good I am feeling on the day and how much speed training I have done.

 

For example. If I am not playing much golf and not hitting balls or doing any speed work I fall back into a 105-108mph range.  If I am playing and hitting balls hard at the range regualrly it comes up to the 110 mark.  All out swings are in the 112-115mph mark.  

 

I dont seem to be able to get any higher.

 

Did the superspeed last year and didnt find it help.  I tried max all out effort with erst days for months and it didnt budge my swingspeed.   I think I just dont have the genetics for it.  Another person may do the same routine and see great gains.

[J.Bex]

16 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

The body will adapt but one guy with slow twich can only convert his slow twitch to intermediate fibres so they will get faster but not turn into fast twitch muscle fibres so they have a ceiling that a person with higher percentage of fast twitch fibres doesnt have.

That seems to be the case, mostly with hybrid fibers converting to pure type fibers and vice versa, though fiber plasticity is very much a thing and things get mixed metabolically.  Article from Galpin:

https://renaissanceperiodization.com/muscle-fiber-types-change-training-end-unfounded-debate/

 

The study of identical twins that he was part of is interesting.  The "trained twin" (TT) that did endurance exercising for 30 years vs the "untrained twin" (UT) that didn't exercise had very different muscle makeup in the leg:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326398362_Muscle_health_and_performance_in_monozygotic_twins_with_30_years_of_discordant_exercise_habits

 

High Type 1 as you'd expect from endurance exercising (jogging, biking).  Interestingly higher Type 2 fast twitch is seen more in sedentary people - which is what we're all after for swing speed.  Maybe we should never train 😉

[J.Bex]

3 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

If I had to guess, Kyle has more fast twitch fibers to begin with.  The WLD guys all train very similarly. 

Totally, which is why I started a thread saying some people are just fast.

Pointing to this article again, this world champ hurdler had unheard of Type 2x muscle composition:

https://renaissanceperiodization.com/muscle-fiber-types-change-training-end-unfounded-debate/

The first found that bodybuilders (n = 8 contained more MHC I/IIa, MHC IIa than age matched physical education students; and MHC IIx were completely absent (21). The other was the only study ever to performed single fiber SDS-PAGE on an elite speed, strength, and/or power athlete found a world record holding sprinter Colin Jackson had an ASTONISHING 24% MHC IIx (video here)(31). How is this possible?! We don’t have a clue. Makes you wonder what would happen if people did biopsies on more people like this….

Edited January 15, 2022 by joostin

[J.Bex]

2 hours ago, SirFuego said:

Triphasic Training by Cal Dietz recently and one study that he references is that elite athletes don't necessarily fire their agonist muscles (primary movers) faster or stronger than non-elite athletes, but rather they relax their antagonist muscles significantly faster

Interesting.  Heard of this from trainer Chris Barnard, Overtime Athletes.  Eccentric, Isometric, Concentric.  Ability to absorb force with eccentric.  Hold force with iso.  Create with concentric.  He mentions GTO (golgi tendon) inhibition as a governor on speed.  Heard somewhere else that may be not true... But in any case great athletic training by him in youtube IMO, and certainly has cred with his own vertical and pro clients.

[SirFuego]

1 hour ago, Trap Junior said:

The body will adapt but one guy with slow twich can only convert his slow twitch to intermediate fibres so they will get faster but not turn into fast twitch muscle fibres so they have a ceiling that a person with higher percentage of fast twitch fibres doesnt have.

 

The only way to know is biopsy of muscle tissue. 

 

Me for example I was always a slow sprinter and always finished down near the last in sprinting competitions in school.  I was never strong either.  I would tend to lose arm wrestling to average kids.  I dont look weak or fat but I perform that way.

 

I played golf to a high level but never had the swingspeed to get to the next level.  I am somewhere i the 105-112mph range depending on how good I am feeling on the day and how much speed training I have done.

 

For example. If I am not playing much golf and not hitting balls or doing any speed work I fall back into a 105-108mph range.  If I am playing and hitting balls hard at the range regualrly it comes up to the 110 mark.  All out swings are in the 112-115mph mark.  

 

I dont seem to be able to get any higher.

 

Did the superspeed last year and didnt find it help.  I tried max all out effort with erst days for months and it didnt budge my swingspeed.   I think I just dont have the genetics for it.  Another person may do the same routine and see great gains.

I don't think too many people would argue that most of our "speed potential", is set by the time we become adults.  A lot of speed is genetic, but a lot of it is also driven by what we did as children and teens (look up the theory of "speed windows" for juniors).

 

However, I also don't think anyone really knows if someone has truly hit their speed potential.  It's certainly possible that they did, but it could also be that person wasn't training with the right stimulus for them.  There are more factors to swinging faster than just trying to swing faster.  So if you go on a quest to get stronger, more flexible, and/or just get in better shape, it's possible that could trigger what is needed to get to that next level.  It's also possible that one simply needs to revamp technique or find a new cue to trigger that speed.   Unfortunately, the only way to figure that out often involves experimentation.  At that point, it really comes down to how much time, effort, and brain power (or money to hire someone to help you through it) you are willing to commit to for something that is likely just a hobby.

 

I'm almost 40 and I'm still getting stronger and still swinging faster.  Maybe I am blessed with genetics and/or my childhood supported the development of speed, but I also kinda let things go in my 30s and regressed quite a bit.  I'm not sure if I'm swinging faster now that I was in my early 20s (access to accurate ways to measure that were few and far between), but I've certainly gained speed in the past few years and am hitting the ball at least as long as I did in my early 20s.  I first tried overspeed training a couple years ago and felt like I plateaued.  Once I started doing other things (getting stronger and more mobile), I started seeing more speed in my swing without as much of a commitment to overspeed training.  I have started getting back into overspeed training and can certainly tell you that I don't feel like I'm at any sort of plateau -- certainly feels like I can keep tacking on the speed.  That's not something I was feeling when I first started overspeed training without doing the "other" things.

[phizzy30]

2 hours ago, SirFuego said:

I don't think too many people would argue that most of our "speed potential", is set by the time we become adults.  A lot of speed is genetic, but a lot of it is also driven by what we did as children and teens (look up the theory of "speed windows" for juniors).

 

However, I also don't think anyone really knows if someone has truly hit their speed potential.  It's certainly possible that they did, but it could also be that person wasn't training with the right stimulus for them.  There are more factors to swinging faster than just trying to swing faster.  So if you go on a quest to get stronger, more flexible, and/or just get in better shape, it's possible that could trigger what is needed to get to that next level.  It's also possible that one simply needs to revamp technique or find a new cue to trigger that speed.   Unfortunately, the only way to figure that out often involves experimentation.  At that point, it really comes down to how much time, effort, and brain power (or money to hire someone to help you through it) you are willing to commit to for something that is likely just a hobby.

 

I'm almost 40 and I'm still getting stronger and still swinging faster.  Maybe I am blessed with genetics and/or my childhood supported the development of speed, but I also kinda let things go in my 30s and regressed quite a bit.  I'm not sure if I'm swinging faster now that I was in my early 20s (access to accurate ways to measure that were few and far between), but I've certainly gained speed in the past few years and am hitting the ball at least as long as I did in my early 20s.  I first tried overspeed training a couple years ago and felt like I plateaued.  Once I started doing other things (getting stronger and more mobile), I started seeing more speed in my swing without as much of a commitment to overspeed training.  I have started getting back into overspeed training and can certainly tell you that I don't feel like I'm at any sort of plateau -- certainly feels like I can keep tacking on the speed.  That's not something I was feeling when I first started overspeed training without doing the "other" things.

I agree with the first line of your post.  I grew up playing little league and played baseball my freshman year in high school.  I think that really helped me hit the ball further than most of the kids on my golf team the other 3 years.  I'd also like to mention that I grew up taking tae kwon do and hap ki do as well as a kid and did that for about 6 years.  Martial artists also tend to have speed for any rotary/swinging sports.  Consider yourself very lucky that you are getting stronger and faster in your 40's.  I maxed out on strength, power and speed in my 20's, kept that going into my mid 30's and then injuries and kidney failure slowed me way down.  Luckily I got my kidney transplant just over 2 years ago and I was able to get some of it back by being able to hit the gym hard again. 

[SirFuego]

4 hours ago, joostin said:

Interesting.  Heard of this from trainer Chris Barnard, Overtime Athletes.  Eccentric, Isometric, Concentric.  Ability to absorb force with eccentric.  Hold force with iso.  Create with concentric.  He mentions GTO (golgi tendon) inhibition as a governor on speed.  Heard somewhere else that may be not true... But in any case great athletic training by him in youtube IMO, and certainly has cred with his own vertical and pro clients.

Thats the primary takeaway most people have from that book, but there are a lot of other interesting nuggets -- particularly how he manages volume and intensity throughout the training cycle as well as how to transition strength to speed.  One thing that tends to not be discussed much is that there are actually two more blocks of training that are discussed in the book -- speed strength, and speed. 

 

The speed strength block appears to be focused performing each rep with maximal intent and stop the set when bar speed drops below a threshold.  I'm trying to figure out if this could feasibly be done without an expensive velocity-based tracking unit though.

 

The speed block is pretty interesting.  Basically, depending on the sport the athlete is training for, the athlete completes as many reps as possible in a specified period of time.  He found that this cue really helped transition their strength to speed.  This is done with lighter weights (<50% 1 rep max), but the forces being produced are pretty high due to the speed of each rep.  The other thing he found with that cue is that athletes are actually speeding up the eccentric part of each rep, too, (such as pulling the bar towards you on the eccentric part of a bench press instead of just letting gravity do most of the work).  This further increases the force output in the transition from eccentric to concentric.  He wasn't seeing with other cues (e.g. complete 10 reps as quickly as possible).

 

I'm hoping to start experimenting with that approach in the upcoming months, but I might need to modify the speed strength portion as I dont have access to a barebell velocity tracking device.

Edited January 16, 2022 by SirFuego

[J.Bex]

12 hours ago, SirFuego said:

Thats the primary takeaway most people have from that book, but there are a lot of other interesting nuggets -- particularly how he manages volume and intensity throughout the training cycle as well as how to transition strength to speed.  One thing that tends to not be discussed much is that there are actually two more blocks of training that are discussed in the book -- speed strength, and speed. 

 

The speed strength block appears to be focused performing each rep with maximal intent and stop the set when bar speed drops below a threshold.  I'm trying to figure out if this could feasibly be done without an expensive velocity-based tracking unit though.

 

The speed block is pretty interesting.  Basically, depending on the sport the athlete is training for, the athlete completes as many reps as possible in a specified period of time.  He found that this cue really helped transition their strength to speed.  This is done with lighter weights (<50% 1 rep max), but the forces being produced are pretty high due to the speed of each rep.  The other thing he found with that cue is that athletes are actually speeding up the eccentric part of each rep, too, (such as pulling the bar towards you on the eccentric part of a bench press instead of just letting gravity do most of the work).  This further increases the force output in the transition from eccentric to concentric.  He wasn't seeing with other cues (e.g. complete 10 reps as quickly as possible).

 

I'm hoping to start experimenting with that approach in the upcoming months, but I might need to modify the speed strength portion as I dont have access to a barebell velocity tracking device.

Got something cool for you to check out. 

 

That fast eccentric is something I do to mix up some exercises like pushups and ab wheel, because of the limited triphastic stuff I've seen.  Velocity trackers are way too much $$, and I figured after seeing your post that there should be an app around.  Looked up accelerometer and downloaded this one:  Physics Toolbox Accelerometer.  Strapped my phone to my chest with one of those elastic resistance bands LOL... Recorded in linear accelerometer mode, and plotted in Excel.  I just used total instead of XYZ axes.  Here are results of 10 fast concentric pushups followed by 10 fast eccentric pushups (trying to drop fast and catch at the bottom):

 

It's a little wacky but I'm sure you could strap the phone (or smart watch?) to a barbell,  or to yourself, to get readings for any barbell movement.

 

OP, sorry if threadjacking.  Might move to another thread, but figure gym speed training and swing speed training are related.

[SirFuego]

5 hours ago, joostin said:

Got something cool for you to check out. 

 

That fast eccentric is something I do to mix up some exercises like pushups and ab wheel, because of the limited triphastic stuff I've seen.  Velocity trackers are way too much $$, and I figured after seeing your post that there should be an app around.  Looked up accelerometer and downloaded this one:  Physics Toolbox Accelerometer.  Strapped my phone to my chest with one of those elastic resistance bands LOL... Recorded in linear accelerometer mode, and plotted in Excel.  I just used total instead of XYZ axes.  Here are results of 10 fast concentric pushups followed by 10 fast eccentric pushups (trying to drop fast and catch at the bottom):

 

It's a little wacky but I'm sure you could strap the phone (or smart watch?) to a barbell,  or to yourself, to get readings for any barbell movement.

 

OP, sorry if threadjacking.  Might move to another thread, but figure gym speed training and swing speed training are related.

Interesting, I do have an old smartwatch I never use that I recall downloading a similar sensor suite for -- might actually have been that app.  I also have some old phones I can use as well.  I'll certainly look into it.  I must have lost concentration the first time I read that section, but the speed strength section, though it talks about using velocity based training, he offers an alternative of looking at the total time of the set (measured on a stopwatch by a coach) as an alternative to a VBT device.  I'd imagine that the data collected by the sensors is "close enough" in accuracy to a person manually timing the set.

 

My only concern about using a generic sensor app is how long and manual the process is for the data to become actionable.  Although that's something I can certainly tinker with.  I've done a lot of automation before and know how to program (software engineer by trade), but I also don't do much in the way of mobile programming.  Either way, might be a fun project to look into.

 

I'm not OP, but I certainly think this fits the discussion as the timing method being discussed is a method that has evidence of translating to on-field speed in other sports.

[getitdaily]

I did the speed sticks protocol for about 6 weeks. I am consistently around 161 ballspeed now. Up from 156-158. I'm going to switch to the par4success blue stick program now. 

[milesgiles]

forced to report I tried a friends speedstick today.. the green one that is 10% less weight than a driver..

 

Got up to 125, which is 9-10 quicker than I was managing with driver (cold here).. so I'll see if there is any impact on the speed of my next session mon or tues.

 

My thought is that being slightly lighter isnt really that significant, its the lack of air resistance that must make up the difference in speed which begs two questions

 

1. to practise 'overspeed' I may have a fiddle with my 3 wood, yes its a little shorter but its a much, much smaller head

 

2. To hit the longest ball possible, a small headed driver is likely optimal (notwithstanding the obviously much smaller margin for error)

[getitdaily]

15 hours ago, milesgiles said:

forced to report I tried a friends speedstick today.. the green one that is 10% less weight than a driver..

 

Got up to 125, which is 9-10 quicker than I was managing with driver (cold here).. so I'll see if there is any impact on the speed of my next session mon or tues.

 

My thought is that being slightly lighter isnt really that significant, its the lack of air resistance that must make up the difference in speed which begs two questions

 

1. to practise 'overspeed' I may have a fiddle with my 3 wood, yes its a little shorter but its a much, much smaller head

 

2. To hit the longest ball possible, a small headed driver is likely optimal (notwithstanding the obviously much smaller margin for error)

Has nothing to do with wind resistance....it's all weight.

 

The 3w will not make you faster. It's heavier than driver despite being shorter. Studies show that swinging heavier actually makes you slower. 

 

You have something going by only using driver. 

[milesgiles]

2 hours ago, getitdaily said:

Has nothing to do with wind resistance....it's all weight.

 

The 3w will not make you faster. It's heavier than driver despite being shorter. Studies show that swinging heavier actually makes you slower. 

 

You have something going by only using driver. 

 

Wouldnt the sw be the same for 3w and driver?

 

I cant see how I can swing it so much faster with just a small reduction in weight? Not saying youre wrong just doesnt sound possible to me.. surely the air resistance is significant?

[getitdaily]

25 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Wouldnt the sw be the same for 3w and driver?

 

I cant see how I can swing it so much faster with just a small reduction in weight? Not saying youre wrong just doesnt sound possible to me.. surely the air resistance is significant?

Swingweight may be the same but static/total weight is not. 3w is heavier. Heavier means slower.

 

No, there is such little wind resistance with the speed sticks. There's really not much in the way of resistance with those. 

 

Seeing a broomstick and then an axe...weight is about 1000 times more a factor on speed than wind resistance when it comes to clubs.