Mo Farah only 12.9 100m time in BBC Superstars Show

1). Rupp ran 11.03 from a two step start (likely hand-timed, I will say)

2). Farah and Rupp have done 15x200 @ 25 w/ 30 seconds rest

3). Farah and Rupp have closed workouts with a 50.x

4). Both have closed RACES in 52.x

5). Both do extensive explosive lifting, sprint drills, and sprinting as part of their training

Bottom line for me:

Rupp: 11.6-11.9/48 mid-high

Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid

I know Geezer and Vent disagree, but they should talk to Alberto.

I ran like 15 seconds on a grass track as a distance runner. 12.9 sucks!

the 800m race (sorry no commentary)

Pre is my favorite wrote:

1). Rupp ran 11.03 from a two step start (likely hand-timed, I will say)

2). Farah and Rupp have done 15x200 @ 25 w/ 30 seconds rest

3). Farah and Rupp have closed workouts with a 50.x

4). Both have closed RACES in 52.x

5). Both do extensive explosive lifting, sprint drills, and sprinting as part of their training

Bottom line for me:

Rupp: 11.6-11.9/48 mid-high

Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid

I know Geezer and Vent disagree, but they should talk to Alberto.

When did they do 12x200 with 30 seconds of rest? Where did you hear this?

My mistake, it was 100 jog recovery. Very close to 30 seconds I would assume.

kdkd wrote:

Did you run your lifetime mile PR the first time you ran a mile?

No, because I ran it again. See.

That's the point and you missed it HAHAHA

so someone runs a race and gets timed and you all tell each other what the time should be and you find a formula on a Kelloggs Rice Krispies site and deduce he ran other than the time timed and someone named Al said it in the swimsuit issue.

am I right so far?

'Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid'

Surely the high should be 12.99 seen as that is what he actually ran

For your fast time what slowed Farah up by 1.19 seconds in the race

If Bolt rocked up on a cold, wet November day for an entertainment show do you think he would run 9.58?

Find me ONE 1.48 athlete on the planet who can't break 12 seconds in the 100m. Any 800m runner who has run at an even half decent level will know where I am coming from.

What about Brownlee brothers, 14.xx 100m and 2:04 800m, looking fluid and easy.

boubatronic wrote:

If Bolt rocked up on a cold, wet November day for an entertainment show do you think he would run 9.58?

Find me ONE 1.48 athlete on the planet who can't break 12 seconds in the 100m. Any 800m runner who has run at an even half decent level will know where I am coming from.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid'

Surely the high should be 12.99 seen as that is what he actually ran

For your fast time what slowed Farah up by 1.19 seconds in the race

1). They were in terrible sprinting conditions

2). Farah is out of season and not sharp speed-wise

3). In light of that, it was probably compounded by Salazar telling him not to go all out

4). Likely his first try using blocks, etc. Needs more practice

Pre is my favorite wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid'

Surely the high should be 12.99 seen as that is what he actually ran

For your fast time what slowed Farah up by 1.19 seconds in the race

1). They were in terrible sprinting conditions

2). Farah is out of season and not sharp speed-wise

3). In light of that, it was probably compounded by Salazar telling him not to go all out

4). Likely his first try using blocks, etc. Needs more practice

1) The winner and second placer seemed to run ok and as for his supposed best when 15 try finding it on power of 10

2) You really don't understand training if you think speed training for a long distance runner is to up their 100m time . It is to increase your speed endurance, if anything he would be doing more weights etc off season anyway

3) He would not have competed at all if that was the case

4) It's not that hard, he didn't trip stumble or anything and he didn't exactly make up ground after the start

Either way its all speculation, the fact is he ran 12.99 and nobody would have put him that slow before the race

1). "As for his supposed best when 15 try finding it on a power of 10." What does that mean? And how do you know the two guys who beat him wouldn't have run a hell of a lot faster in better conditions?

2). No, as I said before The Oregon Project emphasizes PURE speed development and explosiveness, which would improve 100m time.

3). No evidence for this. It's a TV show and an opportunity to make money, he's going to compete but there isn't any reaso to strain for a few extra tenths.

4). Maybe I'l give you this, but I think he could still improve with the blocks.

Pre is my favorite wrote:

1). Rupp ran 11.03 from a two step start (likely hand-timed, I will say)

2). Farah and Rupp have done 15x200 @ 25 w/ 30 seconds rest

3). Farah and Rupp have closed workouts with a 50.x

4). Both have closed RACES in 52.x

5). Both do extensive explosive lifting, sprint drills, and sprinting as part of their training

Bottom line for me:

Rupp: 11.6-11.9/48 mid-high

Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid

I know Geezer and Vent disagree, but they should talk to Alberto.

Those are just mostly made up numbers. You don't understand distance running or speed endurance.

ofigjoij wrote:

Pre is my favorite wrote:

1). Rupp ran 11.03 from a two step start (likely hand-timed, I will say)

2). Farah and Rupp have done 15x200 @ 25 w/ 30 seconds rest

3). Farah and Rupp have closed workouts with a 50.x

4). Both have closed RACES in 52.x

5). Both do extensive explosive lifting, sprint drills, and sprinting as part of their training

Bottom line for me:

Rupp: 11.6-11.9/48 mid-high

Farah: 11.8-12.1 49 low-mid

I know Geezer and Vent disagree, but they should talk to Alberto.

Those are just mostly made up numbers. You don't understand distance running or speed endurance.

Er, yes he does, unless Alberto is lying. A 13 dead 100m runner that can run 15 x 200 @ 25s off 30s recovery... No chance.

A 13 dead 100m runner that can run 13.5 eight times consecutively for a 1.48 800m.... No chance.

I'm loving what can only be the trolling in this thread.

Here's the reality: Mo was slower even than his 12.98 timing. Unless anyone can definitively prove otherwise, I assume that photocell timing was used, which likely means you can add around .2 for RT, and another .1 or so for the arm or hand crossing the line rather than the torso.

I admit that I could be wrong about the timing. Anyone with good info?

The other reality is that Mo's block start, for a distance guy, looked to me to be pretty damn good! No distance runner, even a guy like Geb or Bekele or Lagat, is ever going to "drive" out of the blocks. They will take a couple of hard strides at the start, assume a vertical running posture, and try to accelerate. All things considered, he did much better than I expected him to do. He obviously had the blocks in a very forgiving alignment, had practiced a bit, or both.

So I don't think that either a standing or 3-point start would have made any difference to his time.

Regarding the guys who ran in the 14-second range, that is also totally unsurprising.

Regarding the lack of 100m ability, and the lack of top-speed envelope ability, among elite distance runners, that is again a question of optimization. In a very real sense, you could say that they optimized to NOT be able to run a sub-12 FAT block-start 100m.

It's interesting that some here believe that Mo and other distance elites could NOT go slightly sub-50 in a 400 m.

Let's say that today, Mo goes 13.30 for a FAT block-start 100m. IMHO he was going full-out in this 100m, from start to finish, and even leaned, I think successfully, to shave off a couple of hundredths. Assuming that Mo could run the same 100m around a curve (which I think is a good assumption), the interesting thing about sprinters running the 400m is that they do not run the first 100m all-out.

But, could Mo run an all-out first 100m leg of a 400m without producing a worse time than if he were to hold back a bit? I think that possibly the answer is yes.

It would be interesting to know his speed profile in this race, and if he, like 100m sprinters, was slowing down in the last 20m, or in the last 30-40m like untrained 100m participants. My intuitive sense is that he didn't slow down--instead, I think it possible that he just hit his max speed and held it all the way through the finish.

Further, I fantasize that he could have held that same top speed for another 300m! Even more than that, I think that if he realized that he had another 300m to run, he wouldn't have been as tense in the first 100m, and therefore used less energy, and might actually have sped up in the second or third 100m of a 400m race!

So let's say for round numbers he goes 13.4 in his first 100m, that means that he would only need to go 36.6 for his last 300m, or 12.2 for each of the last three 100m segments, in order to break 50 seconds.

How plausible is it for him to be able to run a 12.2-second 100m, if he can FAT block-start a 13.3-second 100m? Very plausible, IMO, knowing about such differences in sprinters, and knowing how relatively weak Mo's start is.

Without even considering Saladbar's bogus hand-timed flying 100m times, I would give Mo an 11.5 flying 100m, at least for a single 100m, which IMO puts three consecutive 12.2's within his reach, even after an all-out, or nearly all-out, 13.3 first 100m.

Now take a guy like Jeilan in his 10,000m victory. There were 3 times, IIRC that he nearly kicked it into top gear on the last lap, and on the fourth opportunity, he actually DID kick it into top gear. That gear, at that time, in that race, was far better than Mo's equivalent gear. Check out the slow-mo from around :20 in this vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KKBPn4mDlo

I won't go into details, but everything about Jeilan is better, as evidenced by how he absolutely blows Farah away. For the record, I do NOT believe that Farah could easily adopt Jeilan's form, and thus relatively easily produce a faster 100m time. Farah produces zero power--look at all the limb swinging in that vid. Very little power is being applied to the ground.

What do you guys think about Jeilan's ability in a 400m race? He has a top-speed governor, just like all other distance runners, but IMHO it is set slightly higher than Mo's.

Vent?

One_More_Round wrote:

but Heavyweight Boxing gold medalist Anthony Joshua (6'4" 17st/238lbs) won the race in 11.5.

The thought that Mike Tyson could possibly easily outsprint Mo Farrah is considerably frightening ...

boubatronic wrote:

ofigjoij wrote:

Those are just mostly made up numbers. You don't understand distance running or speed endurance.

Er, yes he does, unless Alberto is lying. A 13 dead 100m runner that can run 15 x 200 @ 25s off 30s recovery... No chance.

A 13 dead 100m runner that can run 13.5 eight times consecutively for a 1.48 800m.... No chance.

What? You don't understand distance running either. Speed endurance is what they top runners have, and what you don't understand.

marshallini wrote:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

do you have any better video links?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Biv_97-_TYw

Thanks for the video link marshallini!

It's definitely NOT FAT, as there is no sensor attached to the gun. Also, there is no visible camera setup at the finish line.

What I do see is what looks like the reflector in a photocell timing system, at the finish line.

It was probably one of those photocell systems that uses a microphone to detect the sound of the gun. All the times were likely slower than indicated.

Timing systems like that can actually be OK on the start, if the mike is placed close to the start line, but tend to suck at the finish.