At about 60 second pace.
At about 60 second pace.
At that pace, I would say roughly a second per lap.
I ran a 400 last year with a similar wind. All of us ran about 1.5 seconds slower than our recent times in my heat. That was at roughly 46 to 51 second pace (it was a mixed group), dropping back to 47.5 to 52.5 times in that race.
So that is why my guess for 60s pace is about one second per lap.
Depends which way the wind is going goes. The "basic" sprint times normalize a 15 second 100 with 4 m/s tailwind to 15.35, and with a 4 m/s headwind, 14.34, a net 0.31 disadvantage over 200 meters. Since a lap around a track is actually 157.99 meters of displacement in the direction of the straightaways, it would be a total advantage of .49 seconds per lap if the wind were in that direction. If it were in the perpendicular direction, it would only be only 0.23 seconds per lap. This is of course ignoring the fact that you aren't always moving at 60s/lap pace parallel to the wind direction and that the basic time adjustments assume you're not moving at a constant pace.
HardLoper wrote:
The "basic" sprint times normalize a 15 second 100 with 4 m/s tailwind to 15.35, and with a 4 m/s headwind, 14.34
I'm pretty sure you've got this backwards.
I certainly believe that I lose way more from a headwind than I gain from a tailwind. This was a nearly direct headwind that I ran into twice during a 600m.
The problem with 400-800 type distances is that you always hit top speed in the first 200m, therefore however much you slow down into an initial headwind, you can't speed up again in the 2nd 200 even with the tailwind. The best you can do is decelerate more slowly from the already slow speed resulting from the headwind.
But on the other hand, if you start with a direct tailwind, the tailwind affects the faster half and provides less boost than it would during the second 200. And putting the headwind on the 2nd 200 impedes it more than if it's on the first 200 because slower speeds are affected more by the wind. At least according to all the converters I've seen. The Brain Mac converter for example says 11.0 into a 2.0 hw is 11.14, while 15.0 is 15.24.
I guess what I'm trying to say is a 4 m/s wind sucks no matter where you start.
Bad Wigins wrote:
HardLoper wrote:The "basic" sprint times normalize a 15 second 100 with 4 m/s tailwind to 15.35, and with a 4 m/s headwind, 14.34
I'm pretty sure you've got this backwards.
I certainly believe that I lose way more from a headwind than I gain from a tailwind. This was a nearly direct headwind that I ran into twice during a 600m.
I think you're reading it backwards, actually. HL is stating that the headwind costs .66 seconds, with a 14.34 effort relying in a 15 flat. Tailwind adds .34, rendering a 15.34 effort a 15 flat. Thus, you're lose nearly twice as much from a headwind as your gain from the tailwind.
well, in any case, I concluded the same thing, which I already knew from experience. Headwinds murder me.
RIP: D3 All-American Frank Csorba - who ran 13:56 in March - dead
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Hats off to my dad. He just ran a 1:42 Half Marathon and turns 75 in 2 months!
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday