Wild Hypothetical Workout (Could you do it?)

Your point system sucks the fastest 200M runner automatically wins as long as he is also the fastest 100M runner.

Second I agree with an earlier poster being a descent 800M runner I have a PR of 47 in the 400 and 22 high in the 200. I have gone out in 800 pretty near all out for the first 200 coming through in 23 low and then coming through the 400 M in some cases at 50 or even 49.

Your body does not break down that fast when you are going at your top speed. A lot of the good milers or 5k guys on here can probably hold about their top speed for near 400M.

bump because i definitely wanna try this. if we rig a point system up and put some money up front, i think i can get some of my teammates involved. although the point system may defeat the purpose

To season the pot a little, (Its a great hypothetical workout if done properly) but I would call Domino's and order a large pepperoni pizza to be delivered to the track and eaten immediately before the workout. The last person to throw-up "wins." It will be something for you guys to recall 10 years down the road. And of course, you would want to record that bad boy and post it. Im sure Wejo would put that one on the homepage. At the very least you would get a million hit video. But the cost would be great.

The point of this whole workout is to be funny, and it is interesting because it is so hard to speculate about the results. The hard part is that it is completely effort based. Time and distance don't determine the success. We will probably film this workout being done when cross country ends. I'll create a thread with a link if we ever do it.

The point system would need to be remodified, something like:

1st to 100m (10) 2nd to 100m (8), 3rd to 100m (6), 4th to 100m (4), 5th to 100m (2), 6th to 100m(1)

1st to 200m (8) 2nd to 200m (6), 3rd to 200m (4), 4th to 200m (2), 5th to 200m (1)

1st to 300m (6) 2nd to 300m (4), 3rd to 300m (2), 4th to 300m (1)

1st to 400m (4), 2nd to 400m (2), 3rd to 400m (1)

1st to 500m (2), 2nd to 500m (1)

1st to 600m (1)

This way even if some sprinter type guy blows you away to 200m, instead of being down 18-0 as proposed earlier, you are now only down 18-14, and he knows that all you have to do is beat him to 1 or 2 more checkpoints and he loses. Gives everyone a fighting chance.

Asterix wrote:

Unholy Cumulus wrote:

At worst you would come through the 400 in 65, and I would expect to be able to run six minute pace at worst thereafter.

You've never seen elite marathoners reduced to 7+ minute miles?

There is a difference between being tired from sprinting 400 meters and being tired from running 20+ miles.

I've been reduced to running a 41 second last 200m in an 800... and that wasn't completely balls out from the start (although it was pretty dumb).

Better yet.. no definite time on the interval.. just go until you cannot move anymore.

Along a similar idea, we used to joke about a training method where everyday you just stepped onto the track and sprinted as fast as you could. When you fell below 4min/mile pace, you quick and walk off the track. The goal is to eventually run a four minute mile based solely off this training program.

I would have to agree with this points system but why start on 10 points for the first to cross the 100,and then no points for the 2nd guy past 600m, start at 30 and that way you can still adward high points to the first past 600 and even the 2nd and 3rd and so on

1st to 100m (30) 2nd to 100m (29), 3rd to 100m (28), 4th to 100m (27), 5th to 100m (26), 6th to 100m(25)

1st to 200m (28) 2nd to 200m (27), 3rd to 200m (26), 4th to 200m (25), 5th to 200m (24)), 6th to 200m(23)

1st to 300m (26) 2nd to 300m (25), 3rd to 300m (24), 4th to 300m (23), 5th to 300m (22), 6th to 300m(21)

1st to 400m (24), 2nd to 400m (23), 3rd to 400m (22), 4th to 400m (21), 5th to 400m (20), 6th to 400m(19)

1st to 500m (22), 2nd to 500m (21)3rd to 500m (20), 4th to 500m (19), 5th to 500m (18) , 6th to 500m(17)

1st to 600m (20),2nd to 100m (19), 3rd to 100m (18), 4th to 100m (17), 5th to 100m (16), 6th to 100m(15)

this points system doesnt suit the typical 200-400 m guys as much,who wil get the most points until the 300m mark and then tie up badly leaving the middle distance guys to fight over the scraps, this way there is still something to fight over after the 400m mark, I think its a better way to distribute the points, If you could get 200 m and 400m guys to race 800m and milers it would be interesting to see the results

All these point systems will likely deter from the purpose. And with a point system, there will always be strategizing, like if there's one killer sprinter they would only run hard enough in the first 100-200 to win those points (which is not the goal of the run).

I say just make one rule: every stride must be your max effort. Video the thing and award prizes strictly by spectator judging. After all, such an asinine event could only be appreciated by spectators and not a clock or place as usual.

HAhahhahah yes!

Yes! "No Points" finally gets the idea behind this workout. My teammates joke that this run is only good for judging the size of your balls, not your talent or tactics. Somebody do it already, film it, and post it.

I think we all know whom we'd *really* like to see take this bad boy on: wejo and rojo.

If they ran it honestly--balls to the wall, right from the gun--I might actually be willing to pay a little money to see it.

By the way, to the guy who suggested the pizza? Going *truly* BTTW from step one, for two full minutes, pretty much guarantees vomiting (and/or unconsciousness). No pizza required.

And to the poster who suggested that a distance guy would tie up less in this exercise? So wrong. A distance guy running *absolutely full bore* might not even make it to two minutes--literally might not be able to move at that point.

____________________________________________________

Somehow this whole discussion reminds me of a somewhat similar exercise I used to do--I called it a "crackup" workout. I would run at my mile goal pace as long as I could, until I ran a 220 slower than that pace, at which point I had to stop.

Not the greatest conditioning workout and not too smart psychologically, either (given that failing in the workout was guaranteed), but at least it got me used to keeping the pace up (or trying) in the second and third quarters, instead of backing off.

And I *did* run my goal pace, to the tenth-second, in a mile race that season.

I think the best part about "sams interval" is its connection to the core of running. it's balls out masochism!! you against yourself to stay on your feet for 2 minutes. I love it, let us know how it goes

I don't actually think it would be as painful as everyone thinks ... going out that hard would put your body into fatigue so quickly that you would be able to effectively get into the serious pain zone - it would be more sprint and die. A properly run 800 positive split is far more painful.

That said, I could have seen running 11.8 - 23.1 - 35.5 - 50.5 - 68 - 1:28 - 1:50 in top shape, reaching about 740m at the end ... going 25.5 - 52.0 - 1:21 - 1:53 would be much more painful

as already noted above, this event is "Being Chased."

The real life equivalent of this idea is being chased by a lion.

You must get to 5 feet as fast as possible. You must get to 10 feet as fast as possible.

You must get to every distance as fast as you can; every footstrike is your absolute max power output at that moment.

You will almost certainly be caught by the lion, slaughtered, and devoured, but you still must give it a shot, obviously.

What a great idea! I hope this happens.