When should your spikes go back on?

Here's what's in this week's edition.

​

Evander Wells, the associate head coach at the University of North Florida, got called out online recently for having his sprinters in spikes already.

The thinking is that spikes this early can lead to injuries and burnout.

His answer, in a video on his program, was "I don't think it really matters what week you put the spikes on. What matters more is the volume and intensity you're doing while wearing spikes."

He started at nothing in week one, and by weeks six and seven he was at around 265 metres a week, spread over two days. All his tempo work stays in flats or barefoot, on grass whenever they can.

I'm with him. The worry is fair, because spikes put more load through your calves, Achilles and shins than trainers do. But that's an argument for building up slowly, not for waiting until a certain date.

If you're coaching yourself, here's how I'd do it.

Spend the first week or two back in trainers only. Then put spikes on for part of one session, a few short accelerations adding up to around 100 metres. Add a little each week from there.

Save the spikes for your fastest work, your accelerations and your flying runs. Tempo and anything longer can stay in trainers on grass.

Use your lower legs as the check. If your calves, Achilles or shins are sore the next morning, you've jumped too far, so drop back to the previous week's amount until they settle.

And if you've had a long break with no sprinting at all, take it even more slowly.

Wells makes this point himself. One of the quickest ways to get hurt is to go a long time without sprinting, then put spikes on and do everything you were doing before.

"Some of my fastest sprinters did not look great," Chris Korfist said in a video this month. Korfist has coached high school sprinters in Illinois for over 20 years.

One of his fastest had what he called "a bad crossover", where the feet land across the middle of the body.

But in his words, "his crossover was important to him because he had such strong medial calves and shank architecture that it was actually his magic bullet."

His test is whether the flaw is getting in the way. If the rest of the body copes with it, he leaves it, because "it might be a protective mechanism".

This one hit home for me, because I coached an athlete who did the same thing. Their feet came in towards the middle as they ran, rather than staying in line.

What I found was that trying to "correct" it took far more time and effort than letting them run the way they naturally ran and getting on with everything else. It wasn't textbook, but it was working for them.

What I'd never thought about is the idea Korfist raises, that the crossover might actually be helping. I'm not saying that's what was going on with that athlete. But it's made me look back at it differently.

Michael Johnson is the obvious example. He ran so upright that commentators said he could be the world record holder if he changed his style.

His college coach, Clyde Hart, was the only coach recruiting him who didn't tell him he'd need to change it.

As Johnson put it in an interview, Hart's approach was "you don't change an athlete's style unless there's something that they're doing that is limiting them or something that is counterproductive."

That's the test I'd use. Before you spend weeks on something that doesn't look right, ask whether it's actually costing speed. Film it and look at the times.

If the athlete is still getting faster, write it down, keep an eye on it, and put the time into something that will make them faster.

If it is limiting them, ask why it's there. Stu McMillan and Dan Pfaff make the point in their book on sprint technique that an asymmetry is "almost always due to a musculoskeletal issue" rather than a technical mistake.

So fix the cause, like a stiff ankle or a weak hip, before you start cueing the movement away.

The Premier League put out its tracking data this week. Harvey Barnes is the first player to go over 36 km/h this season, at 36.21.

But look at who makes the most sprints, counted as any run over 25 km/h.

The top three are all left-backs. Truffert has 147, Davis 138 and Kerkez 133, and none of them is in the top ten for top speed.

Paul Caldbeck, who used to lead physical preparation at a Premier League club, explains why in an interview with SimpliFaster.

Many of the sprints players make in a game are below their top speed. Top speed is what he calls a "capacity", something you need in the bank rather than something you use every run.

So there are two different qualities here. How fast you can go, and how often you can go fast.

Your position goes a long way to deciding which one matters more. A full-back running up and down the line all game needs to repeat sprints. A winger or striker who has to get in behind needs the top end.

But if you're young, I'd build the top speed first. Caldbeck says learning to run at high speed over 30 metres or more should be a basic part of a young footballer's training, and I agree.

The higher your top speed, the less of it each of those game sprints uses up.

So once or twice a week, I'd do a few flat-out runs over 30 or 40 metres, with full rest between them.

If your team training already includes that, great. If it doesn't, that's the bit I'd have you add yourself. Your matches and training should take care of a lot of the repeated running.

This summer, at 19, Charlotte Henrich broke Wales's 400 metres record, which had stood since 1982. She ran 50.58 at the UK Championships in June, then took it down to 50.45 at the London Athletics Meet in July.

It was a big year all round. She got her first senior GB vest at the World Relays, finished fourth in the Commonwealth 400 metres and sixth at the European Championships.

In an interview with Athletics Weekly this week, she explained what changed.

"This year the motto has been 'less is more'... I've actually done less, especially in the weights room, because sometimes I would just do 'stuff' and I'd hope it was fine, but we've just focused more on technique and doing things well."

She also credits her coach, Nigel Stickings, who she's worked with since 2023. "He really understands me as an athlete and he's so good at explaining things."

That line about doing "stuff" and hoping it was fine is the bit I'd take away, whether you're an athlete or a coach. It's easy to keep adding things because they feel productive. Another set, another drill, another gym session.

Here's how I'd put it into practice.

Start by writing down every session in the week, and every exercise in the gym sessions. Next to each one, write what it's there to do.

Faster out of the blocks, stronger legs, better top speed, recovery. Be specific.

Anything you can't give a job to is stuff. Cut it, or find out what it's meant to be doing before you keep it.

Then look at what's left and ask whether it's being done well. That's the other half of what Henrich said. Full recovery between sprint reps, good technique on the lifts, and no extra sets just to feel like the work's been done.

Give it a few weeks and watch the times. If the athlete feels fresher and the times hold or improve, you've cut the right things.

The last part is the explaining. Henrich credits a coach who is so good at explaining things.

If you coach, make sure your athletes know what each session is for, not just what to do. If you're an athlete, ask. I think an athlete who knows the why is far more likely to do it properly.

​