Do short sprints help with long distance running?

Many of the top coaches eg Canova, Hudson, Magness, Pfitz (newer edition at least iirc) to name a few all prescribe short sprints (eg 6-10s) in some form (typically hill) at some stage in the training cycle which makes me think, yes. Even for the super long stuff, I know the Roche's whose primary focus is on ultra running spend a lot of time discussing how important speed development is even for ultra runners.

The only US 5,000m gold medalist, Bob Schul, trained almost exclusively with short sprints. He trained under Igloi.

Yes. Rupp actually discussed this on a recent Citius podcast. He repeatedly emphasized how much time and effort him and Mo spent on sprinting, mechanics, etc.

For a typical hobbyjogger who is slower than 17 minutes, not much, unless the "sprints" are at least 200m or longer.

Most people at my club train this way - they will go to the track and hammer out short repeats as hard as they can and then have dog **** endurance when it comes to a race.

I'd argue the issue is that they're doing the same sort of training every week rather than any sort of logical periodisation and progression.

First block start with emphasis on speed development (hill sprints, strides) + aerobic base, then speed endurance + aerobic power, then race specific endurance, then key race. Then repeat. Continuous development of all systems over time.

NB. As an aside, anything over about 10s is no longer classed as a sprint. They also should have complete (5 mins+) recovery. I doubt this is what your club members are doing.

Marius bakken and Leif Olav alnes (Warholm’s trainer) did a lot of experiments on sprint training for distance runners back in the day. His conclusion: It didnt make sense to do a lot of sprint training. Marius threshold suffered when he became better at short distances.

Nowadays, the Norwegians do sprints (60/100-200m) on mondays/wednesdays (if you listen to the podcasts with Jakob/filip/narve). (they also do hills on saturdays - which is 2 x 10 x 200m. )

They do short hill reps, not sprints. You cannot sprint for 200m.

QFE. You mentioned the Roches before. What they talk about, 20-30s hill and flat strides, is not speed development. It’s way too long. Pure sprinting, 8s or less, with full recovery. Speed grows like a tree. This needs to be done weekly for months, years even. I would recommend 6-8s hill sprints with 3-5+ minutes recovery for most people. Flat sprints have a higher injury risk but, IMO, are equally important and should be done eventually. I just don’t trust distance runners to go to the track and rip some 50m sprints right off the bat without getting hurt. Short hill sprints with long recovery for probably a few months are a great place to start. Six reps is plenty. I wouldn’t do more than eight. Then transition to flat sprints.

Mainly mean this as a supplement to distance training. If you throw in some full out sprints, would it help form/strength?

Yes.

From what I have read, maximal speed development and specifically the short 6-10 second hill sprints can have a pretty significant effect on running economy. It seems to follow that the more force you are able to produce will make you more efficient at all distances. The key, as mentioned, is proper long recovery and keeping them very short. I do them once a week with my athletes and have seen some success. It’s not overly time consuming, and not overly taxing with proper recovery in between reps. I usually do them on Mondays and follow up with a threshold type workout on Tuesday and no one has complained of excessive soreness or dead legs. In fact, many have mentioned they feel a little more “pop” in their stride.

I hate posts where the the content is just "discus". Such a lazy, low effort post does not deserve any effort in reply. OP the only thing I discussion I will offer you is a kick in the buttocks.

I never went all out in my strides, with the possible exception of once every other week hitting the last 50m of my last stride at 99.9% effort. I was able to run a mile at 2-2.2s / 100 slower than I’d hit the stride in - i.e. 13.8 for 4:19 mile, 12.8 for 4:00

Wondering whether plyos should also be done, or are the benefits from hill sprints similar

Something I have struggled with doing on my own. I think the comment earlier about not trusting distance runners to rip sprints without getting hurt applies to me! Issue I had was doing too much and not recovering enough. Could get through speed dev sessions no problem but next day, threshold was on tired legs and was toast for recovery days. Solution I came up with was take day between speed and threshold but think I just had to dial back sessions. Currently doing more threshold and have dropped dedicated speed day but will probably add it back towards end of summer or fall. Found it actually helped hamstring issues for me and doing long warmup also served to improve form and get some light plyos in.

MoVB

*responds anyways*

Seems like a good discussion

You should tell all the world's sprinters that; especially the one's that specialise in the 200m.

I think the point is that you change it from being an ATP-CP alactic max speed/power effort to a lactate producing anaerobic workout beyond 10s. Similarly you start deccelerating beyond 8s or so, so it's no longer a max speed workout. If using Merriam's definition of a sprint: "to run at full speed", the latter half of a 200m is no longer a sprint.

Nonsense. He did not "sprint". Perhaps you should read your own link.