my friend thinks u. bolt could run a sub-4:30 mile

xcblong--

Thanks for your honesty regarding the hand timing.

I re-iterate my earlier comment.

And as to a 4:30 sprinter mile, I believe there are only 3 guys who contribute to this board who were sub-10.5, and of those 3, I am the only one who has recorded a mile time.

That mile time was after lots of "distance" training, and 20 years after I was seriously training for, and competitive in, sprints. And I only ever so slightly broke 5 minutes. And it nearly killed me.

Try this: find a short sprinter on your team, and ask them if they are willing to run a timed mile.

First off, there is no way they will agree.

Second, if they agree, let us know what their time is.

Third, record the distance at which they hit the wall.

Fourth, if possible, get a video.

Decent 100/200 guys might go around 6:00. Decent 200/400 guys might go around 5:00. None of them will go 4:30, unless they relatively aren't that great at the sprint, in which case they should really be a middle-distance runner who got put in the sprints because your team is relatively weak at the shorter distances.

A big thing about even middle distance is that pacing is critical--and of this concept, over the longer time period, sprinters are clueless. Also, a proper warmup is critical for aerobic events--and sprinters are clueless of this, also (i.e. an aerobically-beneficial warmup). These things apply even when the "sprinter" is a thin and wiry 400m guy.

The mile must be trained to be run in 4:30--not just jogged every now and then. It must be run at speed, to understand how the body responds, and to be able to optimize performance and stay within the envelope without hitting the wall.

Sprinters know nothing of these concepts. The running, the training, everything is different (of course).

My final thought is that there is no way you will be able to convince a short sprinter to run a timed mile, unless you offer him some serious incentive.

That was actually the line marking the beginning of the straight, so it was an 80m time. So he ran his last 100m in about 13 to 14 seconds. But he really turned it on the last 50m.

atmarush wrote:

Well Bekele closed in 11.xx for his final 100meters for his world record 10k

Complete the xx

Not sub 11 or anywhere close too 11 and with a flying start

Sprintgeezer wrote:

And another thing--I train with a guy who actually goes 51 indoors in the 400 from the blocks, 49 outdoors.

He has not broken 11.25 in the 100m, and he does acceleration and block training all the time. He is very much more a 100m specialist than a 400m specialist, as judged from a training perspective.

1) You never broke 5 in the mile

2) You are definitely not a sprinter as you have no working knowledge of the sprinting events.

3) You don't coach anyone

Congratulations on having the best facade in letsrun history. But you understand if there were more people who knew anything about sprinting on this board you never would have pulled it off.

You blew it big time with the Blake "false start" thread last summer and now with saying Rupp couldn't go sub 13 from the blocks. Do you have any idea how many high school coaches use sprint races as workouts for dual meets. (As Lydiard suggested.) We've coached many guys - and as someone mentioned a few girls - that have far less speed than Rupp and routinely go under 13.

I don't understand why you think it is so hard for a distance runner...especially someone like rupp or lagat or webb to go sub 12 in a 100m from blocks.....i'm no elite runner and definitely do not have much speed, but I broke 12 from blocks in high school after 10, 400 repeats at sub 70.....I agree with you that I doubt Bolt could break 4:30 and probably wouldn't be close....but jesus man 12 seconds in the 100 meter dash is not very fast at all..Considering many high school girls can go mid 12's it wouldn't be a problem for top milers and 5k dudes who have to have a ton of speed to go sub 12....you're annoying stop trolling

a wooo--

Sometimes I wonder if you guys even read the posts.

I specifically excluded Lagat and Webb from this discussion. Webb is a mid-distance guy with some acceleration and speed. Lagat is a longer-distance guy with acceleration and speed.

Rupp is totally different.

Why is it so difficult for you to believe that you were faster in a block-start FAT 100m than Rupp would be, or that Rupp would only be as fast as a good female HS sprinter?

As for the mid-distance guys and the fast 5k guys, IIRC I said that they could likely get to the mid-11.x's with specific training.

WHY would Rupp be so bad? Read the posts. Rupp has ZERO acceleration, even when he already has momentum. He would be absolutely useless from blocks, not to mention that the top speed he exhibits in a distance race basically IS his absolute top speed, which is insufficient to run a good 100m.

But really it's about the acceleration from the blocks.

Rupp has none. Lagat and Webb would have some, and Jeilan seems like he could have a high top-speed envelope.

100m from blocks requires DRIVE of which Rupp would be incapable. 100m speed requires angles that Rupp never comes close to achieving. Transition requires turnover that Rupp has never exhibited.

I absolutely don't understand why people on this board can't wrap their heads around the fact that short sprinting is a totally different event from distance running. You would never suggest that Rupp could do reasonably well in any other power event, why a short sprint?

I've been around plenty of excellent distance runners who looked like Rupp. Their speed and acceleration was absolutely nothing, and they were not sub-12 FAT 100m from blocks guys.

And believe me, I know that a 12-second 100m from the blocks is a slow 100m. I know exactly how slow it is. Lagat and Webb, and any other good middle-distance runner, or anybody who demonstrates speed and acceleration like Lagat, would have little problem breaking 12 seconds after they got to try the blocks once or twice. Rupp? Not a chance.

Same with Bolt in the mile. 4:30? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

Exactly which thread was that, Douche?

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Exactly which thread was that, Douche?

The one I state. Look, you're a great troll and I respect your ability to hoodwink so many distance runners into thinking you are any kind of sprinter, it's impressive. Just in this case you have said something really silly and you need to be called out. You know nothing about sprinting, or running. This thread, as with the Blake flinch thread, proves it. You just chose to ridiculous a time. 13 flat is easy for anyone of moderate talent. Blocks are a red herring. Give me anyone who can tie their shoelaces and in a week they will be faster out of the blocks than from a stand or three point. Rupp goes 11.5-11.9 from the blocks guaranteed.

Guaranteed by whom? You? Yeah, right.

To say that Rupp has even "moderate talent" at sprinting would be very generous indeed.

Like I said, which thread WAS that, Douche?

Touche wrote:

The one I state. Look, you're a great troll and I respect your ability to hoodwink so many distance runners into thinking you are any kind of sprinter, it's impressive. Just in this case you have said something really silly and you need to be called out. You know nothing about sprinting, or running. This thread, as with the Blake flinch thread, proves it. You just chose to ridiculous a time. 13 flat is easy for anyone of moderate talent. Blocks are a red herring. Give me anyone who can tie their shoelaces and in a week they will be faster out of the blocks than from a stand or three point. Rupp goes 11.5-11.9 from the blocks guaranteed.

You think 4 Rupps in a 4x100 goes 43.xx or 44.xx? I sincerely doubt that.

Sprint.....oh I read it, and completely understood what you were saying...i was just reiterating that 5k dudes are not that slow and used lagat as an example...

as for Rupp....the dude is a sub 1:50/4:00 guy...which is not too shabby for a 5k/10k specialist. He has to have quite a bit of speed to do that. I was pretty similar to Rupp size wise in high school. Was only 120lbs and could go sub 12 from blocks. Was also a sub 9:10 guy for 3200, but was only 4:20 for the mile. I did not have speed. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU THINK IT WOULD BE SO HARD FOR HIM TO DO IT. Someone that can run an 800 in under 1:50 has some speed and he has more than you give him credit for. I get that they are two completely different events but we're not talking sub 10 seconds here..........

I've already told you twice. It's fun to see you all worked up though. I actually just reread this thread where you say you ran under 10.5. Now that's funny. Problem with people who simply pretend to have experienced the sport at a high level and in actuality have never even spent an hour talking to a truly gifted athlete is they think like you do. You think Rupp is this skinny 10k guy so you can declare he has no speed. Truth is most idiot high school coaches would have seen Rupp as a 400 runner because he could have scored points for them. this kid was close to 4 flat in high school. No one runs close to 4 flat in high school without decent speed.

A true 10.5 sprinter would know what a vast difference there is between 10.5 and 11.5. An 11.5 sprinter isn't really a sprinter. They are either a distance runner who hasn't been forced to move up yet, or a waste of time. Anyone who can't run under 11.5 should be banned from anything under 400 meters and that's in a podunk small school. If it's California or Texas, you're an 800 runner. 13 flat is too slow to comprehend. i honestly don't believe there is a sub 14 5k runner in the world who could not run under 13 from the blocks. There certainly isn't a 4:10 miler in the world who couldn't run under 12.5. Keep getting all upset though. I didn't think it was possible to anger trolls. This is fun.

Touche wrote:

A true 10.5 sprinter would know what a vast difference there is between 10.5 and 11.5. An 11.5 sprinter isn't really a sprinter. They are either a distance runner who hasn't been forced to move up yet, or a waste of time. Anyone who can't run under 11.5 should be banned from anything under 400 meters and that's in a podunk small school.

This is simply wrong. 4 11.5 guys will go 43.x in a relay. Pick a random state meet and see where that time falls, they're all online now. California, Texas, Florida and a few more probably it won't qualify. Somewhere like Nebraska it's probably top 10 even for the big schools. I think Rupp is faster than SprintGeezer thinks, but I think an 11.5 is faster than you think.

God this thread is off track. Nobody asked what Rupp can run for 100m. What can U. Bolt run for a mile? (Is that a full mile?, why not a 1500m?, etc.)

asdfasdf wrote:

This is simply wrong. 4 11.5 guys will go 43.x in a relay. Pick a random state meet and see where that time falls, they're all online now. California, Texas, Florida and a few more probably it won't qualify. Somewhere like Nebraska it's probably top 10 even for the big schools. I think Rupp is faster than SprintGeezer thinks, but I think an 11.5 is faster than you think.

Like I said, you'll pick up some points, but NO ONE is recruiting 11.5 sprinters. I had this exact argument with a parent three years ago. His son ran 11 high as a Freshman. I told his son he needed to move up to the 4 if he wanted any future at all. He of course knew everything so he told his son he didn't have to move up. Now he runs 11.5 as a senior and his career will be done in May.

I actually have 43.5 relay teams every year and only the 400 meter guys run in college because a well trained 11.5 guy breaks 50 so they go on. It's all what you want of life.

Touche wrote:

Like I said, you'll pick up some points, but NO ONE is recruiting 11.5 sprinters. I had this exact argument with a parent three years ago. His son ran 11 high as a Freshman. I told his son he needed to move up to the 4 if he wanted any future at all. He of course knew everything so he told his son he didn't have to move up. Now he runs 11.5 as a senior and his career will be done in May.

I actually have 43.5 relay teams every year and only the 400 meter guys run in college because a well trained 11.5 guy breaks 50 so they go on. It's all what you want of life.

"Won't make it on a college team" is pretty different than "Should be banned from running" the event. Obviously a 11.5 100m runner isn't going to do anything in college if that's his best event, I agree with that. Unless the track is covered with snow and ice and he runs in crampons.

IMO Bolt doesn't come close to 4:30.

11.5 is slow, even for high school. You can run a 50 flat 400m off of 11.5 speed though if you're well trained, which can allow you to run at a D-III or some of the weaker D-II schools as a relay guy.

It takes about an 11.3 FAT to be a reliable 4x1/4x2 guy in high school unless you're in a joke state. The winning relay team in my state last year averaged 11.16 FAT in the 100m.

Ideally, someone that runs an 11.5 is a slow 800/fast 1500 guy. It takes at least 11.1 speed to have even a slim chance of being a good 400m runner.

Also, no chance Bolt even breaks 5 minutes in the mile. I'd tag him at about 5:30.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Plus, Bekele is not Rupp. Bekele would crush Rupp in a sprint, as would (has) Lagat.

When was this Rupp v. Lagat 100m show down? Is it on youtube?