@Bro Mo ....you want performance gains and you mention track in some other threads.
Can you pin it down?
Much like
@kennycro@@aol.com says above: do you want performance gains for a heptathlete, or a sprinter, or mid distance runner, or shot putter?
As a good level heptathlete, you won't have the top speed or a 100m sprinter, nor the throwing prowess or upper body strength of a shot putter but you can be good at them both and be a good high jumper, if you can work on your height, even better! So a heptathlete has a massive GPP and developed skills in a variety of pursuits.
And all of that is relative of course, good for you and your goals but maybe not good enough to compete and perform at a national level.
I see myself as a generalist most of the time and I dip my toes into sprint specialism. With a broad base of generalism, it allows you to, doesn't it?
But, but, but...that's not the same as sprinting and doing a marathon, or sprinting and doing a 10 k even. Of course, you can, there is no crime here, just you won't be very good at both, compared to the competition, which again is relative. You can do a marathon reasonably well and compete in the Dad's sports day, sure or be a top level sprinter and do a marathon in 6 hours.
So performance gains for what?
Speed strength is specific to the task. Even within sprints, there are differences, strengths and weaknesses. And I can imagine within lifting to, the speed required for some lifts will be specific to them, no? Of course, there is some crossover. And so to the heptathlete thing - will you be the best at all disciplines compared to the competition? Probably not. If you excel in most and just be ok in a couple, that maybe enough for a high points score. You maybe excel in all running events and absolutely suck at everything else, so you fail to qualify. So next time put some work into the javelin and high jump OR ditch everything and pick your best running distance - where are you relative to specialist sprinters or mid distance runners or distance runners??
So reckon you need to pin it down and laser in. Performance gains generally, including speed and power v specific speed and power gains.
So do you compete to your strengths or work on your weaknesses?
If your endurance is crap on a 10k but you can run a 55 sec 400, which one do you prefer? Forego some speed in favour of better endurance?
Quick in a 60, quick-ish in a 200?
That's my dilemma. Improving my 200 times will not harm my 60 too much. Improving my 60 will improve my 200 and 100.
I need to be faster. More speed.
If I wanted a good 400, then more nasty speed endurance is required. But I don't need or want any - even though at my age I do a sub minute 400, to do a fast 400 requires exponential levels of grief and vomit that I'm not committed to!!
And that's the issue - how bad do you want performance? What can you commit to?
I like and enjoy running fast and enjoy the training process with that aim. But I'm not going to kill myself nor wreck everything in my life to gain an extra 0.1. At the same time if my times were ball park final potential in the world champs I might dig in, if a fancy a pop at it.
So, this is my take: broad base GPP, stick with that.
For running speed and power - what distance?
And if you want speed - ditch 400 repeat vomit sessions (unless 400 is a specialty) - and focus on running fast. Strength - strong enough is relative. Speed too - fast enough is relative.