Big Calves Hinder Speed/Vertical?

Training Powerlifting
21

In my experience bigger calves are better for moving furniture faster… therefore, whenever moving I tend to look for the cows…

Also, the proponenets of bigger equal better on this thread should stick to the “two men and a truck business” because speed and large calves have basically zero correlation…

The examples cited of athletes with large calves are all people who do large volumes of accelerating, cutting, and decelerating…

The aerobics instructor at the YMCA has bigger calves than most sprinters… should we line her up to race?

Calves are merely a limiting factor in sprinting… our good LORD, or mother nature, or whoever you believe in gave us this very inefficient lever right where we transfer force into the ground. So yes, strength is a factor, but more importantly is it useable strength, as in rate of firing…

If the calf doesn’t reactively respond and fire when under conditions of very high rate, then you will simple leak force out of that region…

Now, are there big’uns who don’t have quick-twitch calves who are explosive… of course. Mark V is probably a beast for 20 yards… when you weigh 220 and squat 1000+, you can afford to leak some power…

But speed is reactive more then pure acceleration…

Big calves help? Nope. Big calves hinder? Not really, although they may slightly slow leg recovery.

But, the most important factor is if the calf is reactive.

Huge ass, big glute-ham tie in, cables for erectors, and a properly tuned PF region equals speed… oh, and those so often chastized quads do help you get off the line…

J

22

What measurement falls under “big calves”?

23

[quote]Professor X wrote:
What measurement falls under “big calves”?[/quote]

Imo over 17 inches i would start callin calves big.

24

Theoretically adding size to your calves might slow you down a bit as you have to haul that extra weight around with each stride.

The real factor that might make “small calves” appear superior in running and jumping is the length of the achilles tendon. People with big calves tend to have a short achilles and people with small calves tend to have a long achilles. Providing the hips, thighs, and calves are strong enough to absorb force with each footstrike in a sprint (or transition out of the countermovement in a jump), the achilles acts like a rubber band.

Take a small rubber band, pull it back, let it go, and see how far it goes. Do the same thing with a longer rubber band.

That pretty much explains it.

25

[quote]OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:
Now I’ve heard that increasing calf size can make you slower and lower your vertical. Is this true or another silly myth? Anyone have any experience with this???[/quote]

just make sure you increase the power production in comparison to your bodyweight increase and you should have better performance. Considering your tendon length will not change the only thing you can worry about is making the calves stronger and more powerful. Wanting to make them bigger to look better physically will only weaken performance if there is no corresponding strength increase. As far as running goes, there is a factor of strength endurance that needs to be addressed in regards to the growing muscle. This should be accomplished through your various training activities.

even when i put on thirty pounds of muscle after college my vertical did not change because of the corresponding strength increase in the muscles. And yes the calves do help in the vertical and in running. If a muscle fires during an excercise then it contributes to the motion. laters pk

26

[quote]Kelly Baggett wrote:
Theoretically adding size to your calves might slow you down a bit as you have to haul that extra weight around with each stride.

The real factor that might make “small calves” appear superior in running and jumping is the length of the achilles tendon. People with big calves tend to have a short achilles and people with small calves tend to have a long achilles. Providing the hips, thighs, and calves are strong enough to absorb force with each footstrike in a sprint (or transition out of the countermovement in a jump), the achilles acts like a rubber band.

Take a small rubber band, pull it back, let it go, and see how far it goes. Do the same thing with a longer rubber band.

That pretty much explains it. [/quote]

Kelly,

My 13 year old son has been doing deadlifts and his 40yd dash time has skyrocketed. How much more speed can we get out of him if he started doing more barbell squats? He doesn’t like squats all that much…

What do you think?

It seems that the deads work the posterior chain better than squats anyway.

No?

What are the two or three most important gym exercises that he can perform that would increase his speed?

Thanks for your time,

Zeb

27

Ray Caruth has big calves?.. OJ Simpson has big calves…

28

[quote]Kelly Baggett wrote:
Theoretically adding size to your calves might slow you down a bit as you have to haul that extra weight around with each stride.

The real factor that might make “small calves” appear superior in running and jumping is the length of the achilles tendon. People with big calves tend to have a short achilles and people with small calves tend to have a long achilles. Providing the hips, thighs, and calves are strong enough to absorb force with each footstrike in a sprint (or transition out of the countermovement in a jump), the achilles acts like a rubber band.

Take a small rubber band, pull it back, let it go, and see how far it goes. Do the same thing with a longer rubber band.

That pretty much explains it. [/quote]

Kelly,

I’ve never bought the idea that tendons have an elastic quality. I don’t know, but I think tendons are completely inflexible. Is there any proof out there? I think it would be pretty easy to prove or disprove in a lab.

29

For Ray Caruth size he did have big calves.

OJ I thought had the “stick” calves.

30

One of the things I just thought about was when I played college ball there was really no relation between calf size and speed…there was a relation between ankles and speed though…almost all of the burners on the team had relatively thin ankles.

31

[quote]djrobins wrote:
For Ray Caruth size he did have big calves.

OJ I thought had the “stick” calves.[/quote]

I don’t really know. I’m just trying to make the Funniest Poster thread.

32

Most common comment by coaches who hire my company to do speed training:

You know, most weeks we stay in games because we are stronger and have better technique than the other team, but 80-90% of the time we are slower…

How does this fit into the thinking of the bigger and stronger = faster crowd?

Fast is relative strength, reactivity (this is NOOOOOOOT Strength), and proper body position. Calves position themselves as one of the single biggest contributors to reactivity, and are the biggest limiting factors in driving force into the ground (and absorbing it for those of you who do more than run in a straight line… aka athletes). For the most meager, this is a factor of strength and size…

But, after a certain baseline is passed, the contibution of the calves is determined by the rate of the firing, not the strength.

So, if you have little dinky smooth, pencil thin, joke calves, like those most commonly found on suburban kids, then you better get your butt on the calf machine…

But, if you have passed the point of being a goofy X-Box playin, mall hangin’ out, drivin my parent-bought beemer to the tennis match level athlete, then you better be doing rate dominant work, because absolute speed is very, very reactive.

Or, you could join the thousands of kids each year who aimlessly follow the bigger is better mantra, who were born with zero reactivity, and scratch your heads when the squat rack doesn’t deliver the glory you search for…

“I know my sausage legs are strong, why can I not run like a Gazelle?”

And you will perpetuate the age old, very ignorant mantra: speed is genetic.

Track speed is genetic… team sport speed isn’t (necessarily).

It is genetic if you don’t address your most limiting factor:

is it relative strength, reactivity, or body position?

Strength is one factor to speed.

One.

Any track coach worth his salt tests, or can see the athlete’s level of reactivity, and will assign a presciption of plyos accordingly…plyos are RATE dominant with a very high magnitude of force.

It isn’t quite as simple as bigger is better.

Ever see a gymnast who is slow and cannot jump?..hmmmm.

Maybe this is something I should look into… doh!

Being soft and 34, I bet I can only squat 2X my BW right now… much less than anyone at Westside in terms of a relative value… and I mean anyone. Those guys are BEASTS! Hell Mark V squats 5X his BW or so…

I am still a sub 11s 100m runner, and broad jump over 10 feet as of this very morning’s session with an MLS hopeful.

I bet my vertical and speed would hold up pretty well… as a ‘soft, weak guy’.

Relative strength is one factor…

One.

J

33

Analogy of OJ and Ray. Hmm.

34

Jumanji, you magnificent son of a bitch! You’re a bit caustic but in this PC world, frankly, I love it. Like Zeb, I have a son in similar circumstances. You have helped already. His coach is of the strength mantra. I am already ‘seeding’ his head with “Strength is great but you need to get to the play”…meaning being very quick in the 10-20 yard box w/lateral quickness. Anyway, breaking down barriers in the effort to teach more correctly. Thx, Coach.

35

[quote]djrobins wrote:
For Ray Caruth size he did have big calves.

OJ I thought had the “stick” calves.[/quote]

Um…well we know he had a big knife…

36

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Most common comment by coaches who hire my company to do speed training:

You know, most weeks we stay in games because we are stronger and have better technique than the other team, but 80-90% of the time we are slower…

How does this fit into the thinking of the bigger and stronger = faster crowd?

Fast is relative strength, reactivity (this is NOOOOOOOT Strength), and proper body position. Calves position themselves as one of the single biggest contributors to reactivity, and are the biggest limiting factors in driving force into the ground (and absorbing it for those of you who do more than run in a straight line… aka athletes). For the most meager, this is a factor of strength and size…

But, after a certain baseline is passed, the contibution of the calves is determined by the rate of the firing, not the strength.

So, if you have little dinky smooth, pencil thin, joke calves, like those most commonly found on suburban kids, then you better get your butt on the calf machine…

But, if you have passed the point of being a goofy X-Box playin, mall hangin’ out, drivin my parent-bought beemer to the tennis match level athlete, then you better be doing rate dominant work, because absolute speed is very, very reactive.

Or, you could join the thousands of kids each year who aimlessly follow the bigger is better mantra, who were born with zero reactivity, and scratch your heads when the squat rack doesn’t deliver the glory you search for…

“I know my sausage legs are strong, why can I not run like a Gazelle?”

And you will perpetuate the age old, very ignorant mantra: speed is genetic.

Track speed is genetic… team sport speed isn’t (necessarily).

It is genetic if you don’t address your most limiting factor:

is it relative strength, reactivity, or body position?

Strength is one factor to speed.

One.

Any track coach worth his salt tests, or can see the athlete’s level of reactivity, and will assign a presciption of plyos accordingly…plyos are RATE dominant with a very high magnitude of force.

It isn’t quite as simple as bigger is better.

Ever see a gymnast who is slow and cannot jump?..hmmmm.

Maybe this is something I should look into… doh!

Being soft and 34, I bet I can only squat 2X my BW right now… much less than anyone at Westside in terms of a relative value… and I mean anyone. Those guys are BEASTS! Hell Mark V squats 5X his BW or so…

I am still a sub 11s 100m runner, and broad jump over 10 feet as of this very morning’s session with an MLS hopeful.

I bet my vertical and speed would hold up pretty well… as a ‘soft, weak guy’.

Relative strength is one factor…

One.

J[/quote]

Jumanji,

Excellent post.

I understand your point about strength being only one thing. But, it seems to be a pretty darned important thing.

The only thing that my son did over the winter was Deadlift like crazy, and do lots of Chin-ups. And now he’s head and shoulders above everyone in the 40. He is destroying guys that beat or tied him before.

Now…I’m guessing that strength is far more important in the first 20 to 30 yds. and that’s why he’s doing so well in baseball, short spint distances in between bases and of course the 40 yd dash.

But I wonder what else I can add to his training which will increase his speed even more. And perhaps give him an even better 100 meter time.

Glute Ham machine?

Squats (he hates those lol)?

Plyometrics?

Any suggestions will be appreciated.

Zeb

37

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jumanji wrote:
Most common comment by coaches who hire my company to do speed training:

You know, most weeks we stay in games because we are stronger and have better technique than the other team, but 80-90% of the time we are slower…

How does this fit into the thinking of the bigger and stronger = faster crowd?

Fast is relative strength, reactivity (this is NOOOOOOOT Strength), and proper body position. Calves position themselves as one of the single biggest contributors to reactivity, and are the biggest limiting factors in driving force into the ground (and absorbing it for those of you who do more than run in a straight line… aka athletes). For the most meager, this is a factor of strength and size…

But, after a certain baseline is passed, the contibution of the calves is determined by the rate of the firing, not the strength.

So, if you have little dinky smooth, pencil thin, joke calves, like those most commonly found on suburban kids, then you better get your butt on the calf machine…

But, if you have passed the point of being a goofy X-Box playin, mall hangin’ out, drivin my parent-bought beemer to the tennis match level athlete, then you better be doing rate dominant work, because absolute speed is very, very reactive.

Or, you could join the thousands of kids each year who aimlessly follow the bigger is better mantra, who were born with zero reactivity, and scratch your heads when the squat rack doesn’t deliver the glory you search for…

“I know my sausage legs are strong, why can I not run like a Gazelle?”

And you will perpetuate the age old, very ignorant mantra: speed is genetic.

Track speed is genetic… team sport speed isn’t (necessarily).

It is genetic if you don’t address your most limiting factor:

is it relative strength, reactivity, or body position?

Strength is one factor to speed.

One.

Any track coach worth his salt tests, or can see the athlete’s level of reactivity, and will assign a presciption of plyos accordingly…plyos are RATE dominant with a very high magnitude of force.

It isn’t quite as simple as bigger is better.

Ever see a gymnast who is slow and cannot jump?..hmmmm.

Maybe this is something I should look into… doh!

Being soft and 34, I bet I can only squat 2X my BW right now… much less than anyone at Westside in terms of a relative value… and I mean anyone. Those guys are BEASTS! Hell Mark V squats 5X his BW or so…

I am still a sub 11s 100m runner, and broad jump over 10 feet as of this very morning’s session with an MLS hopeful.

I bet my vertical and speed would hold up pretty well… as a ‘soft, weak guy’.

Relative strength is one factor…

One.

J

Jumanji,

Excellent post.

I understand your point about strength being only one thing. But, it seems to be a pretty darned important thing.

The only thing that my son did over the winter was Deadlift like crazy, and do lots of Chin-ups. And now he’s head and shoulders above everyone in the 40. He is destroying guys that beat or tied him before.

Now…I’m guessing that strength is far more important in the first 20 to 30 yds. and that’s why he’s doing so well in baseball, short spint distances in between bases and of course the 40 yd dash.

But I wonder what else I can add to his training which will increase his speed even more. And perhaps give him an even better 100 meter time.

Glute Ham machine?

Squats (he hates those lol)?

Plyometrics?

Any suggestions will be appreciated.

Zeb[/quote]

You can’t really make him squat obviously. It will come with time.

Cleans would help big time.

Plyos would help tremendously. They are very important for overall athletic development just as the weights are.

At 13, probably not to young to start the little guy on a cap a day of ZMA either.

38

Zeb~

Don’t get me wrong, strength is very important. But true top speed is more reactive than strength based… in fact, trying to muscle your way down the track is a sure way to be left behind.

Now, in terms of acceleration, relative strength is ULTRA important. Coach Ross merely uses deads, but I would also work my way through a single leg progression. JoeD, Kenn, and probably every coach worth a poo emphasizes the core stability required to do single leg movements… but do not throw out the deads. Of course squats are good, but depending on how the rest of the training is structured, they may be able to be avoided, or merely use front squats… I did that for a long time: Deads and fronts on alternating weeks.

Nicholas is dead on, but understand that plyos must be worked through progressively… a first year gymnsat doesn’t just triple flip off the high bar and stick a landing… there is an exellent gymnastics coach who posts here from time to time who wcould help you out for sure… he wrote a BW article a while back.

and, if you are going to do the Olympic lifts, I would invest in some very good teaching DVD’s. Athlete’s acceleration makes some that I have heard are good. I actually prefer using versions of classic lifts (FDA’s, REA’s, etc.), but it is just because the bar is much tighter to the spine that way… just as I have kids use trap bars as opposed to straight bars… just my preference.

The guys here I am sure know a ton of good teaching tapes. You could also probably PM guys like Tate of CT… good people who would lend a hand.

If you don’t know plyos well, go read DB Hammer’s Torsion article… it is a good starting point. And, read everything by Kelly Baggett. Also, go spend a day at Barnes and Nobles, and get to learn some easyt progressions from simple to complex…

Basically, if you have your kid start with bounds anddepth jumps I will have to Rochambo you.

If you are willing to spend some bucks, both of CT’s books serve as a perfect training bible type guide for beginners… awesome… no other way to describe them.

Scipio~ Sorry about being chiding tonight. Just too many sessions with soccer kids with no definition… how is that managed… c’mon now… seriously.

Do we really wonder why on the world stage we stink at Futbol?

J

39

[quote]Nicholas F wrote:

You can’t really make him squat obviously. It will come with time. [/quote]

No, I’d never do that. But if he realized that it would not only make him stronger but faster he might start liking them as much as I do.

I’ve heard that, good idea.

[quote]Plyos would help tremendously. They are very important for overall athletic development just as the weights are.

At 13, probably not to young to start the little guy on a cap a day of ZMA either. [/quote]

ZMA at 13?

Sorry, I’m not following you on that one…

?

40

[quote]Jumanji wrote:
Zeb~

Don’t get me wrong, strength is very important. But true top speed is more reactive than strength based… in fact, trying to muscle your way down the track is a sure way to be left behind.

Now, in terms of acceleration, relative strength is ULTRA important. Coach Ross merely uses deads, but I would also work my way through a single leg progression. JoeD, Kenn, and probably every coach worth a poo emphasizes the core stability required to do single leg movements… but do not throw out the deads. Of course squats are good, but depending on how the rest of the training is structured, they may be able to be avoided, or merely use front squats… I did that for a long time: Deads and fronts on alternating weeks.

Nicholas is dead on, but understand that plyos must be worked through progressively… a first year gymnsat doesn’t just triple flip off the high bar and stick a landing… there is an exellent gymnastics coach who posts here from time to time who wcould help you out for sure… he wrote a BW article a while back.

and, if you are going to do the Olympic lifts, I would invest in some very good teaching DVD’s. Athlete’s acceleration makes some that I have heard are good. I actually prefer using versions of classic lifts (FDA’s, REA’s, etc.), but it is just because the bar is much tighter to the spine that way… just as I have kids use trap bars as opposed to straight bars… just my preference.

The guys here I am sure know a ton of good teaching tapes. You could also probably PM guys like Tate of CT… good people who would lend a hand.

If you don’t know plyos well, go read DB Hammer’s Torsion article… it is a good starting point. And, read everything by Kelly Baggett. Also, go spend a day at Barnes and Nobles, and get to learn some easyt progressions from simple to complex…

Basically, if you have your kid start with bounds anddepth jumps I will have to Rochambo you.

If you are willing to spend some bucks, both of CT’s books serve as a perfect training bible type guide for beginners… awesome… no other way to describe them.

Scipio~ Sorry about being chiding tonight. Just too many sessions with soccer kids with no definition… how is that managed… c’mon now… seriously.

Do we really wonder why on the world stage we stink at Futbol?

J[/quote]

Jumanji,

Thanks for the great response. I’ll buy the books that you suggested on Friday.

About the squats…What do you think his set rep pattern should be if we go that route?

Also what do you suggest for sets/reps with Cleans?

And finally…what do you think of Glute Ham machine? Any suggestions on how much, and how it should be used?

I think Kelly Baggett speaks quite highly of The GH machine…or am I mistaken?

Thanks again,

Zeb