600m AR broken

Cas still peaking in January--some habits are hard to break

Is this some kind of joke? The smaller track makes times slower. That is why anything run on a 300m track does not count as an indoor record.

Now a Coach wrote:

been around ya' know wrote:

Well Cas already had the fastest 600m run indoors by an american but it was on an oversized track and not ratified. I'm just genuinely curious about the advantage or disadvantage of altitude on a 600m. Just trying to start a conversation. No need to be a douche.

Sorry for any offence.

No, there's no advantage to running at 600m. The benefits start around 2400m.

By the way, is it an AR or American best? The USATF doesn't seem to recognize a 600m AR.

What is wrong with everyone posting on this thread? Am I in the twilight zone?

Altitude makes for a faster 400 meters...but a slower 800 meters.

I suspect it helps the 600 meters, which runs more like a long 400m than a short 800m. I say that because my experience was always that a good quarter miler would always beat an equally good half miler at 600 yards and I suspect the same is true at 600 meters. Hence, the 600 meters is a long spring not a middle distance run. And altitude helps spring and hurts distance runs.

Anybody find any studies on this?

Weird wrote:

Non hard core track fans please quit reading so you wont get confused. Loxsom has actually run faster for 600m indoors than he did today. In 2013, he ran 1:15.42 to winthe Big 10 Indoor Championships, but it was on a 300m oval track that doesnt count for record purposes. Loxsoms run today was on a 200m banked track which is eligible for record purposes, so Loxsom should be soon certified as your new American record holder.

___________________________________________________________________________

Yea, this is weird! It makes it sound like the smaller the track, the greater the vortexing momentum, thus a faster time (?) What possible difference could it make? Reminds me of the "bottom bulge" theory in Olympic size swimming pools where if the bottom surface is slightly convex underneath, it then creates a slight bulge on the surface, thus allowing for faster times. Cass is on the edge of making the Olympic teamnext year - it's gonna be close!

_____________________________________________________________________________

Is this some kind of joke? The smaller track makes times slower. That is why anything run on a 300m track does not count as an indoor record.

______________________________________________________________________________

Well, this is what I'm saying. I agree, a smaller track would in fact do such a thing (which actually didn't happen in this case) but then why would then a 200 meter banked track (which is obviously smaller than a 300 meter oval, last time I looked) be then eligible for record purposes? I personally think the regulation on that is silly - banked or unbanked, 200 or 300 meters, an indoor record is an indoor record! Maybe a Hamster wheel record is in the works - Ha!

Yes, it did happen in this case. His time on the larger track was faster. What on earth are you smoking? Anyways, I agree that it is strange that banked tracks count. However, you are making it sound more confusing that it is. The maximum allowable track size for an indoor record is 200m. End of story. As of now, banked tracks count for record purposes.

No research and I might not know much but just observing my teammate who was a top world ranked 400 meter runner (84 4 x 4 Olympic gold medalist) and other top 400 runners compete in several 600 yd races between 1:07.9 & 1:09+ on 200m unbanked tracks. My conclusion will always be that until more modern day 400m runners step up to run the modern 600m run, the record will continue to be soft. The Big 12 conference still contests the 600yd event though.

To be honest, I think the approach to the indoor season and speed development for sprinters vs. mid distance athletes has changed over the past 30+ years. Danny Harris, Roddie Haley, Ray Armstead and the likes would jump up to 500 & 600 yards for speed endurance training. The event is a crossroads with the 800 guys looking for some speedy competition. The fact of the matter was that the 400 guys were faster starters and really understood how to work through heavy fatigue in the later stages of the race and typically won on having the courage to strike early and hang on. The 800 guys mentality was to pace themselves and hope to be strong enough to pull in the struggling sprinter but I never saw it happen. The coaching approach for the 400 meter guys was that this was also training for multiple rounds of 400/400IH meter qualifying later in the season without all of the reps.

In addition, the fact that passing indoors is much more challenging than outdoors always played right into the hands of the sprinter who would get out faster than the mid distance runner. Not many people have that extra gear after a fast start and able to snap-off the last turn with enough to pass others in that short of a race.

Again, no research, just observations. The 600 is a great distance for these athletes during the indoor season for a variety of reasons.

Congrats to Cas-

Interesting observations OF Coach. Not sure if I agree, though. Most sub 1:46 guys can probably split a legit 47 or better and have 4x4 experience. At the extreme end of 800 talent, rudisha has an open 400 pr of 45.15. Only a few long sprinters will have actually run true quality 800 times. Pretty sure that big ten 600 meter record has been held by succession of champion 800 guys. The outdoor 600 meter world best is held by 800 great Johnny Gray at 1:12.8 and I wouldn't call that a soft time.

it's worth noting that 600 meters is 60 yds longer (10%) than 600 yd event you reference. At this crossover distance that extra 60 Yds might be where the Half milers catch up to the 400 guys-

It does seem speed endurance is critical factor as opposed to either raw sprinting speed or obviously aerobic endurance. The successful 600 guys I knew were more muscular than average mid distance guys and a fair amount of long sprinters.

I agree that a moderate positive split is best approach. 600 is a great event and the sprinter/ md cross over is awesome to watch . Would love to see some top flight 400 guys switch up during indoor to 600. Not a coach, not a 600 guy, just a fan-

My experience was that the 800 guy almost always nipped the 400 guy at the line. Could have just been that the 800 guys are a bit more tactical savvy though

dsrunner wrote:

You got it backwards. With a little more distance work he can't run 1:15.

Whatever gets Lox his best 600 gives him his best 800.

Finally someone gets it right.

All of you guys saying JW could do this or Loxsom could do that with more endurance just don't get it.

Reader of Twitter wrote:

Yeah, I'd say it's mostly a product of very few attempts on the record. IIRC Symmonds was around 1:16 flat for his 800 in the 2012 final, so it seems like he could (at his 2012 fitness) go at least a second faster for 600.

I've seen on youtube, Nick Symmonds race the big guy who paced David Rudisha to the American soil 800m record, I forget his name. The race was over 600m because Symmonds is better at 800m, but it was just like when he raced David Rudisha himself in the final. Symmonds was outrun from gun to tape, the guys with world class 400m speed can just run away from him. In the 800 meters, it is of huge tactical advantage to be at or near the lead at 600 meters. The race is almost over there. Even for a "kicker" like Nick Symmonds, he needs to kick at 400 -600 to hope to be in contention the last 200.

So no, I don't think that Nick's 1:16 translates to a sub 1:15 600. 115 flat sure, but he was probably in sub 3:30 1500m shape (if the pacing were so ideal, everyone ran remarkable times that day).

Still mid distance wrote:

I agree that a moderate positive split is best approach.

Do you agree that the sky is blue?

mr. obvious wrote:

Cas still peaking in January--some habits are hard to break

Maybe in college where the athletes have multiple responsiblities but on the Brooks team w/ a different coach and goals, Cas got 2nd last year at USA's. I would expect the same focus on Outdoor USA's this year.

true 800 man wrote:

Still mid distance wrote:

I agree that a moderate positive split is best approach.

Do you agree that the sky is blue?

In a big race you might want to draft the first lap which might save you enough energy to negative split. I think the best approach is fast slower fast ??? You can't rely on having the energy to negative split, but don't run the first lap so fast that you miss reaching your second wind.

I wrongly answered the wrong question.

Dial it up wrote:

My experience was that the 800 guy almost always nipped the 400 guy at the line. Could have just been that the 800 guys are a bit more tactical savvy though

One of the dumbest tendencies is armchair running commentary is to say that the person who came from behind was more "tactically savvy."

For some runners, using their strengths means they will do best from the front, not from behind. As a fast 5000 guy, if I race Mr Usain in an 800 with me running even splits while he races his best time possible with a positive split, and I catch him, that's not "tactics."

mr. obvious wrote:

Cas still peaking in January--some habits are hard to break

It does always seem that way doesn't it? I wonder if the guy runs really well off base work, then as we get farther into the season and the training emphasis becomes more traditional 800 stuff he just stalls. Maybe he needs to train more like a miler like Symmonds.

C'mon guys. Cas ran an American record and was only .4 secs off the all time indoor world best. Although the 600m is a specialty event, the ar record at any distance is an admirable achievement in its own right. Full stop.

Cas was second last year at us outdoor 800 champs. He got beat by Duane Solomon who has a 800 pr 3 secs faster than cas. Not sure why posters think he has trouble peaking. Seems like he is just well suited to 600m distance. Give the guy some well deserved credit-

lame post by you wrote:

Dial it up wrote:

My experience was that the 800 guy almost always nipped the 400 guy at the line. Could have just been that the 800 guys are a bit more tactical savvy though

One of the dumbest tendencies is armchair running commentary is to say that the person who came from behind was more "tactically savvy."

For some runners, using their strengths means they will do best from the front, not from behind. As a fast 5000 guy, if I race Mr Usain in an 800 with me running even splits while he races his best time possible with a positive split, and I catch him, that's not "tactics."

Think before you post big dog. Never once did i say the 800 guy has to come from behind. I did imply that sprinters run from lanes most of the time, where as tactics play a much larger role in the 800.