than
than
You have to consider how wimpy sprinters are. Distance runners sprinting 100 meters, nbd, we might be a little slower, but we'll do that 20 times. A sprint workout would be like 5 x 100 with 5-10 minutes break between each, none at top speed. Asking a sprinter to do 3 miles for conditioning is like pulling teeth on a grizzly. When you factor in toughness, it is much more impressive that someone like this could race twice.
letsrace wrote:
You have to consider how wimpy sprinters are. Distance runners sprinting 100 meters, nbd, we might be a little slower, but we'll do that 20 times. A sprint workout would be like 5 x 100 with 5-10 minutes break between each, none at top speed. Asking a sprinter to do 3 miles for conditioning is like pulling teeth on a grizzly. When you factor in toughness, it is much more impressive that someone like this could race twice.
Untrue
Spoken like a guy who's never raced a 10k on the track...or anywhere for that matter.
Have you ever done a real sprint workout? I've tried doing 5x 150m with full rest for kicks.
I made it through three reps before I died. The fatigue is unlike anything in distance running. The energy demands are staggering.
Sprinting and distance running are like 3rd cousins. They're related but very different.
I agree with the coach. 45 mins is not enough rest.
If you're one of the best distance runners in the country than I completely agree with Holloway.
It is not so much about the ability to recover aerobically, but the impact that full sprinting has on the central nervous system. In terms of a max velocity sprint ,for a distance runner, you need at least 1 minute recover for every 10m. The faster the speed an athlete can hit, the more time you need to recover. That is why world class sprinters need so much time to recover between races.
I am not saying that the 100/200 and 5k/10k are harder than the other. They are completely different animals.
What would Jesse Owens think about whether it was enough time?
I agree with Holloway to a certain point. The championship 10k/5k double is much easier than the 100/200 double as they tend to be jogfests with a fast last 2 laps. No such thing for the sprints.
Now, is there a sprinter bias in total points available in the meet? Outdoors absolutely, indoors not so much. There needs to be a distance relay added to outdoors: 4x800 or distance Medley.
His point was the double is easier AS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED. 45 minutes v. two days recovery. Reading comprehension, dullards!
Plausible Denial wrote:
His point was the double is easier AS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED. 45 minutes v. two days recovery. Reading comprehension, dullards!
Why does no one read well here???
Kread wrote:
Plausible Denial wrote:His point was the double is easier AS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED. 45 minutes v. two days recovery. Reading comprehension, dullards!
Why does no one read well here???
Agreed that the double is harder as currently scheduled.
I wouldn't agree with him that it is unfair, though. Of course it is fair, every competitor has the same choices of events and the schedule is published in advance. Unfortunate for somebody hoping to do the 100/200 double and with a goal of placing or winning, but I wouldn't say unfair.
It's easier to get a double in the 5K and 10K then the sprints than what?
letsrace wrote:
You have to consider how wimpy sprinters are. Distance runners sprinting 100 meters, nbd, we might be a little slower, but we'll do that 20 times. A sprint workout would be like 5 x 100 with 5-10 minutes break between each, none at top speed. Asking a sprinter to do 3 miles for conditioning is like pulling teeth on a grizzly. When you factor in toughness, it is much more impressive that someone like this could race twice.
Very few distance runners can run a 100m hard enough to matter.
Most of those people are doubling in the 100/200, so it doesn't hurt them more than their competitors, and it just isn't very hard to do max sprint effort once for 10 or 20 seconds with 45 minutes rest, compared to running a 5000m two days after a 10000m, probably in the heat since it is in June. Conventional wisdom says you need one day of rest per mile raced. Two days is very much inadequate for a 10k.
Plausible Denial wrote:
His point was the double is easier AS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED. 45 minutes v. two days recovery. Reading comprehension, dullards!
A 10,000 meter race is more than 100 times as long as a 100 yard sprint, and with NO recovery in between them. Two days is only 64 times as long as 45 minutes.
Thus the sprinter is getting much more rest between races.
Mike Holloway just proved his lack of knowledge.
Not debating which is harder, but I thought sprinters liked a quick turn-around from semis to finals at major meets. Aren't the semis and finals often very close at Worlds and Olympics?
kmaclam wrote:
"But the Florida coach does detect a new format bias that he believes works against sprint doublers. "For me, I think the biggest disadvantage in my opinion is the fact that between the finals of, say, the 100m and the 200m you have about 45 minutes. But you have 2 days between the 10K and the 5K. I'm not sure that's fair. But the bottom line is that it is much easier to double in the distances than it is to double in the sprints at the nationals.""
What's the percentage of runners who are running the 5k/10k vs the folks running the 100/200? Are there more running the distance double than there are running the sprint double? Or are more people doubling 100/200?
As a distance runner it makes sense to have two days between the10/5k. Could you imagine how much fun it would be to sit in the bleachers watching a distance double with only 45 mins. between races?
Not being a sprinter, maybe it's not enough time between events. But it's a level playing field for those that double. Although I can understand if someone who's doubling is sprinting against some others who aren't.
Life is full of tough choices and so is determining what events to run at track meets.
45 minutes for a pure sprinter is a grey area where you don't want to be, and this is probably what Mike Holloway is complaining about. It is too long to hold your warmup after the 100. But a full warmup for the second event takes about that long. You are not going for quite a full warmup for the second event, but 45 minutes isn't enough for any kind of rest and any kind of warmup. What you want is 2 hours. They are giving ~90 minutes in the OT.
You also do not want 1 or 2 days. Force goes up exponentially with speed and the force level at 9.84 is so high that it can take 7-10 days to fully recover. Go back to the 2008 OT with Tyson Gay, and see what happened.