With 4 weeks of specific sprint training, how fast do you honestly think you could run a 100-meter race?

11.7 after 4 weeks down to 10.8 after 12 weeks.

word. wrote:

SURFBOARD wrote:

+1

OP is either trolling or knows nothing about sprints.

Are you really this stupid? Because you have zero speed or ability to break 12 seconds, it means there is absolutely NO WAY I can break 12? Who's really trolling here? I've seen skinny white junior high schoolers break 12 in their first race off almost no training. If you have any speed at all, breaking 12 seconds IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT (if you are male, at least)

And no, I'm not going to film it because your retarded claim you'll give me money is a lie. And I could easily post a different video of someone else breaking 12.

Damn, didn't realize that this many people have so little speed.

Mo Farah ran 12.9 in a 100. And he runs 11.3 for a flying 100. The Brownlees can't even break 14. I bet you are slower across the board than Mo Farah, and even if you're not, you aren't 0.9 seconds faster over 100 and definitely couldn't run 10.5 for a flying 100.

Give it up, you're not fooling anybody. Oh wait, I guess you already did.

Oh, and as for proof, just send me the name of a guy with 1:58 / 4:12 PRs, with a picture of him, and a video of the same guy running under 12.0 for the 100, and an email/paypal address. If they look remotely similar I'll count it. I am confident you can't do it and probably will never even attempt it in private.

FOOIJ wrote:

SO THIS IS BASICALLY YOU SAYING SPRINTING COMES EASIER AND REQUIRES LESS WORK. ON A DISTANCE DOMINATED MESSAGE BOARD FORUM.

I HATE MY LIFE. FIST ME WHILE SKRILLEX PLAYS

POD

Do you think I should post this on Sprintzone so my buddy Sprintgeezer (not his handle on Sprintzone) can have a good laugh (along with everyone else)?

I assume he's going to run 11.4 FAT in the same meet where Maurice Greene runs 31:18. If you don't get this, 31:18 is the same percentage of Bekele's WR as 11.4 is of Bolt's. Do you think there are any sprinters stupid enough to post with a straight face that they're going to run 31 and change after just 4 weeks of training? Don't think so. This level of stupidity requires a distance runner.

coach d wrote:

Do you think I should post this on Sprintzone so my buddy Sprintgeezer (not his handle on Sprintzone) can have a good laugh (along with everyone else)?

I assume he's going to run 11.4 FAT in the same meet where Maurice Greene runs 31:18. If you don't get this, 31:18 is the same percentage of Bekele's WR as 11.4 is of Bolt's. Do you think there are any sprinters stupid enough to post with a straight face that they're going to run 31 and change after just 4 weeks of training? Don't think so. This level of stupidity requires a distance runner.

Oh no! Coach d!ck is going to post this thread on sprintzone to show how obvious it is that I (an anonymous poster he's never met) physically cannot break 12 seconds. That is truly stupid.

Why do you not understand that it is easier for distance runners to step down to 100 meters than it is for sprinters to race a 5k or 10k?

word. wrote:

Why do you not understand that it is easier for distance runners to step down to 100 meters than it is for sprinters to race a 5k or 10k?

LOL!!!

I don't always like coach d's posts, but he is spot on here and knows infinitely more about sprinting than you do. If Sprint Geezer still posted on here he'd agree as well.

I don't even think Nick Symmonds would break 12 out of blocks and he'd be way ahead of you.

SG and I have had that discussion before, and the big issue that distance runners have is poor leg power. See the post by Nick Willis a week ago that he cannot break 50 in the 400 because he cannot get up to speed fast enough. To run 50 in the 400--as a sprinter--you need about 23 in the 200 and 11.5 in the 100. And if Rupp and Farah cannot do this (from 3pt or blocks), oh sure, some anonymous loser on a message board is going to do this, and it would take a lot longer than a month just to get sprint technique correct and learn how to use blocks--not to mention the time it takes in the gym to get the power needed so that blocks aren't actually slower than standing.

You might be better off racing Mike in San Diego. Oh, wait a minute, I'll bet he can actually run that 21 minute 5K. Better off making a fool of yourself on a message board...at least there won't be a video on youtube of your 15 second 100.

No idea, because I don't know just how badly the sprint start would slow me.

Given full flying conditions I think I could probably run close to 12.00, so I'd guess high 12 or low 13 for 100 FAT from blocks.

SURFBOARD wrote:

Road Race History Expert wrote:

And I am certain you could not. Most WORLD-CLASS 800/1500 runners could not run 11.4 on only 4 weeks prep. If you could you're in the wrong event, that's for sure.

If you ever want to back it up, I'll put money on you not breaking 12.

+1

OP is either trolling or knows nothing about sprints.

You actually know nothing about both sprints and MD if you think that world-class 800m runners can't run 11.4. Even national holder from my country with 1:44 ran 11 and the female world record holder ran 11.07.

word. wrote:

This includes weights, block starts, etc.

Obviously it depends on what type of runner you are, but as an 800/1500 guy I think I could go about 11.4.

Add a second

lol this thread is funny

11.4 is actually fast, trust me I coach sprinters and also MD guys to get faster. I have several sub 2 min guys who cant get close to 11.4.

I see this same argument with footbal/soccer players who think they are quick over ten meters so think they are fast over 100 lol

Top speed and speed endurance is a lot different to distance running mechanics or even muscle fatigue at that speed.

As for those saying they can go sub 11 easily cos they did a 49 relay split hahaha you guys make me chuckle. if you could do that off 4 weeks training then waste your time trying to be an average/poor MD runner when you coudl be a good/very good sprinter?

simple question?

Even though I mostly agree with OP I think he underestimates the time it takes to get up to speed if you haven't worked on your turn-over for a long time. Also, distance running kills your leg power. But with 3-4 months of training I believe OP could do what he says he can do.

I'm sure I could dip below 12 with 3-4 months of training. One month isn't enough for much improvement. At least not for me.

It's hard to run under 12 for you I think..

Bros, what's this crap about sprinting once, and then stopping? And a block? What's that? When you're SPRINTING into the burning sorority to save as many hot lives as possible, there won't be blocks on the street, and you better run back in. And then, you better have the strength to carry 200+ lbs on your shoulders while SPRINTING out (that's two chicks bros; anyone that weights 200+ alone is getting left). All of this training to sprint once is almost as bad as you skinnyfat sloggers talking about your 5k slog times. Not functional, bro, not functional at all. You gotta get with some crossfit style SPRINT REPEATS, done with a 200 lb weighted vest, inside an active volcano. My box is inside a volcano. Try to keep up.

You asked for opinions, you got them, now go do it or stfu.

I primarily focus on 5K. A while back a friend talked me in to doing a track meet.

I'm not a fast runner, with a 5:03 mile and 17:21 5K PRs set the year before.

I ran 58.2 and 13.2, without no specific training, no blocks and in racing flats.

I'm 5'7", 150 pounds with very little upper body strength.

I reckon I'd gain a second in 4 weeks with specific training using blocks and spikes, so I'd be happy with 12.2.

I don't think I could ever run sub 11 even if I focused full-time on sprinting.

as a 49.8/1:54 400/800m guy my senior year of HS I ran a 11.65 FAT out of the blocks with no specific training. also had a 4:20 mile PR.

Last year I did some flying 60 meters for fun. Hit 7.0.

I think I can run sub 13 in race. Maybe 12.5 with 4 weeks sprint training?

My 800m PB is 1:59

1500m PB is 4:01.

5k 15:40