![\"\"](\"https:\/\/helpingthebesttogetbetter.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/frontback-1024x785.jpg\")
<\/a>Front- side mechanics is the in itself plausible idea that the front-side of the running stride is important too, but in my opinion it is exaggerated in the sense that it is considered to be more important than back-side mechanics. The application of this concept can be seen in the development of exercises that focus on the front- side phase of sprinting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Of course this does not make sense at all. Simply because front-side and back-side mechanics are inseparable parts of the running stride, where a proper back-side mechanics prepares for a proper front- side mechanics and a proper front-side mechanics sets up for a proper back-side mechanics!
\nAlso, the relative proportion and importance of mechanics depend of the phase in the 100 meters, we can see different proportion in the start and acceleration phase and in the maximum speed phase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a matter of fact, the discussion about a more active front-side mechanics is almost 50 years old. In the groundbreaking book of Toni Nett: \u201cDer Sprint\u201d, these topics were already raised and discussed, like the extension of the rear leg in the take-off (back-side) and the active clawing action in the frontside-phase.(2)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Often young coaches talk about \u201cold school\u201d training concepts, which is strange to me, not in the least because nobody is able to define old school nor new school. Is it the age of the coach? Nor does the word \u201cold\u201d or \u201cnew\u201d say anything about the effectiveness of the concept. How would you rate the training of Usain Bolt? What would be the criteria to see a sprint training concept as being \u201cold school\u201d or \u201cnew school\u201d. Is it divided purely along the lines of front-side vs. backside mechanics, like front-side = new school, back- side = old school? Is it based on the choice of exercise and drills? Is something new school because you use instability exercise, TRX and speed ladders, or do a lot of cross-fit with your athletes?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Recently a pretty good research article appeared about the phenomenon of front-side mechanics, you\u2019d better read it yourself, but let me surprise you with the summary of the result of this biomechanical research: \u201cOverall, the present findings did not support that front-side mechanics were crucial for sprint performance among the investigated sprinters\u201d.
\nTheir overall conclusion was: \u201cFront-side mechanics did not predict maximal linear sprinting performance in the present group of sprinters. Even though several front- and back-side variables were largely associated with accelerated running performance, their relationship directions were opposite compared to how the theoretical concept has been described. Instead, the current results emphasize the importance of optimal knee- and hip extension at the point of lift-off. And: \u201cThe present results do not support the importance of the concept of front-side mechanics for sprint running performance. Thus, this concept should not be regarded as generally applicable\u201d. (3)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
My observations are that we see a lot of young sprinters trying to apply front-side mechanics by trying to make holes in the track. Talking to coaches and athletes the two wide-spread assumptions here are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. the sprinter should apply more force on the ground\u2026. so basically, the harder you pound the track, the faster you go? A higher vertical force is the result of sprinting faster, not the cause!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2. the shorter the contact-time, the faster you run\u2026. in my opinion, the best way to create a shorter contact-time is to run faster, not the other way around!
\nThe contact-time is determined by how fast you run, or else how fast you are able to move your center of mass (e.g your hips) during the contact-time. Suppose your legs are 1.00 meter long and you move your center of mass more or less horizontally 1.00 meter while sprinting 10 meters per second. So you cover that 1 meter in a contact-time of 100 msecs, or 0.10 seconds, but when you run 11 meters per second, your contact-time will be 1.00 meter\/11.0 = 91 msecs or 0.091 secs.<\/p>\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/helpingthebesttogetbetter.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/Sprint-CM--1024x628.jpg\")
<\/a>