You stated "Wilson's 49.48" is the 1# performance of the meet.
I agree and this should be lighting up this Forum and site.
I know how everyone is just all over Tuohy, but they are not in the same universe.
One is a national (maybe can become a world class) class great athlete and one has run the second fastest time ever indoors for the 400m.
Wilson's performance is not only World Class, but if ran a few months ago would have broken an almost 40-year dirty World Record.
Wilson's performance will be remembered in the history books and by the world.
Everyone around the track and field world (including Letsrun) has been talking about Bol and Tuohy this indoor season and rightly so, (meanly **Bol - because of world times/records), but let's give some flowers to this lovely young woman. McLaughlin, Mu, nor Bol have run this time as nonprofessionals, and only Bol as a professional as run faster.
It's not that hard to learn to switch legs and steps. A whole offseason will do it. Syd was a lot faster last year. Bol is a second quicker this year than last. Wilson as well.
You stated "Wilson's 49.48" is the 1# performance of the meet.
I agree and this should be lighting up this Forum and site.
I know how everyone is just all over Tuohy, but they are not in the same universe.
One is a national (maybe can become a world class) class great athlete and one has run the second fastest time ever indoors for the 400m.
Wilson's performance is not only World Class, but if ran a few months ago would have broken an almost 40-year dirty World Record.
This is also the issue for the Bowerman - Wilson, Alfred, Diggs, Nugent, Moore, Willis are all making world class efforts, while Tuohy is setting college class records. It's exciting that Tuohy is beating 15yr old records and is now competitive w US pros. In distance, however, the US is not really competitive on the world stage, but we are in sprints, hurdles and jumps.
It's not that hard to learn to switch legs and steps. A whole offseason will do it.
Obviously you are wrong. If it were easy to switch legs and do 14 steps then lots of women hurdlers would be already doing it. But they aren't. Why? Because it's hard.
There is no doubt in my mind that Wilson will be on every U.S. 4x400 in the foreseeable future. That will be a pile of gold medals by career's end, considering what we saw in Eugene last Summer.
Which brings up another 800/400 female Force of Nature: Let's not forget Athing. She might get tired of snatching gold out of Keely's hands and drop down at some point. The women's 400 could be in upheaval the next few years.
Heck, Michael Johnson did a fair amount of endurance training and he was a 2/4 guy. Early season Clyde Hart athletes did a lot of aerobic sessions that fit right into typical 800m training methods.
That’s true, but he already had a baseline of speed that he could work to better endure. Sure he never technically broke 10, but he definitely could have. If you focus too much on the endurance when you don’t have speed, there’s really nothing to endure.
Competition for McLaughlin this year with Bol and Wilson in the 400 Hurdles? After that 50.69 It looked like McLaughlin would have no Competition for years, but Bol and Wilson have improved their flat 400 immensely, so maybe she will hav e competition
Wilson doesn't do 14 steps and Bol is going to try for the first time this season, while conceding she doesn't know how it will work out or even if she'll carry 14 through hurdle 3, 5 or 7 before reverting to 15 steps.
McLaughlin is so far advanced with the step pattern. She already goes 14 through 7 and looks more refined every season. Plus she's also the fastest coming home from 8 to 10. Bol seldom covers 8 to home in less than 16 seconds while McLaughlin's best split is 15.28 and her norm is 15.5 territory.
The flat speed among the 3 is a heck of a lot more competitive than when translated to hurdles. That's why it would be silly for McLaughlin to switch to 400 flat and surrender her greatest advantages.
Tokyo was much more competitive than it should have been, because McLaughlin screwed up on hurdle 9, chopping to 16 steps. Somehow that never became a topic in the aftermath of the race. She actually downshifted from 16 on 9 to 15 on 10. That never happens in 400 hurdles. Once you go up you either stay at that number or go up even further.
If McLaughlin not not messed up hurdle 9 in Tokyo she would have run something like 51.15. There would already have been a pronounced gap over Muhammad and Bol. Instead an entire offseason was devoted to the competitive nature of that event. It was nonsense.
McLaughlin took it out so fast in Eugene she reached hurdle 8 in 35.0, compared to 36.0 in Tokyo. That blows the doors off the field. None of the others are capable of sub 36 right now. McLaughlin admittedly struggled coming home, after such a torrid early pace. Her 15.68 -- though tremendous for anyone else -- was the slowest she's been in years. This season the emphasis will undoubtedly to maintain or slightly improve on the 35.0 level while not faltering quite as much coming home.
But those gains at best case will logically be a tenth or two, not the huge block that was still available to her last year simply via not screwing up the step pattern on 9.
Thank you for stating this. I swear a lot of people on here just assume Syd’s raw speed is the only difference and she could just run 47.3 on the 400m if she trained for it or something crazy like that
And you would be wrong. It’s not a sprint at all, it’s a fast run, and requires a ton of pacing to get right.
This is largely a matter of semantics. You’re not wrong but people may differ. A miler may feel almost as if he is sprinting all out in a 400m.
I don't think it's semantics, I think that running and sprinting are two different movements.
True sprinting is a series of takeoffs, while running is a series of takeoffs and landings. While a miler may "feel" like he is sprinting, "feel" has nothing to do with it. It is not about speed, it is not about fatigue, it is not about range of motion, it is not about pumping the arms, it is even not about keeping the knees high--it is about front-side action, with no/as little backside action as possible. You are in a power position when you strike, you are not absorbing shock. This requires specific form, strong specific musculature, high-speed muscular coordination, etc.. To a person who understands how to sprint, it "feels" absolutely nothing like running, it is very specific and totally different.
When people talk about a "long sprint", they are most often talking about a very fast run. A "long sprint" race can be somewhat of a hybrid, with some true sprint form early, followed by a transition to a fast run form. True sprint form is inefficient, but it is the only form that will permit maximum acceleration and maximum speeed. As distance increases, it becomes both very sub-optimal, and actually impossible to do with any speed, because its inefficiency very quickly leads to depletion at the high rate of output that is possible.
It's hard to describe the difference, however it is also why you can just look at someone and see if their form is suited to the 100m or not. Of course energy systems and neurology also play critical roles, and you can see some people with good 100m times who don't properly sprint, like Felix--who was a VERY fast runner. But when you look at the very top of the 100m ranks, you see people like SAFP, SCR, ETH, FloJo, who you can see actually have sprint form...and among the men, guys like Greene, BJ, Powell. Maybe the best illustration is FloJo--just watch her 100, and even her 200, and compare them to her 400. They are completely different motions, while for instance Felix's motions seem much more similar--and that is why Felix was never going to touch even 10.7, and maxxed out at 10.89 (+1.5); she was essentially a 11.0x runner at her best. Her second-best was 10.92 (+0.7), then 10.93(+1.5), then 10.96, 10.98, etc. By raw times you could say she was a mid-10.9 runner. The best 100m women are 10.6 or 10.7. Look even at Tianna Madison at 10.78 (+1.0), someone who had true sprint form.
Think about Kim Collins doing a 400m--do you think he could do it with that 100m form? Think what you will about his PB, but he got everything possible out of his body. While you may not think of him as that strong, the power he developed was enormous, if not the absolute force.
It is why Ackbar was never going to be a 100m star. IIRC it was something to do with his back that didn't permit the motion--so he became a very fast runner and dominated the 200 and 400, the 200 by having the best-ever second 100m, by far, using the more efficient fast running form. Compare him to his contemporary Bailey, who hit that 9.84 and might have hit 9.7 had it not been for all the false starts--look at that sprint form, and imagine him trying to do that for 400m.
We see some guys at the top, guys like Bolt, Blake, Gay, who could run extremely fast because they were jacked up, and because they had excellent sprint form to set them up for the fast running. Check out a guy like Blake, watch a quarter or a semi where he sprints to the lead, then "shuts it down" pretty far from the line...THAT is maybe your most graphic example of a shutting-down of sprint form, and an adoption of running form. Guys will shut down the sprint as soon as possible, because EVEN 100m is a long time to maintain a sprint form, and anything after 50m therefore comes with the possibility of injury, and the certainty of depletion. To talk about anybody maintaining a fast actual sprint for even 200m is outrageous, let alone for 400m.
Sometimes guys will shut it down and maintain a sprint form, but when they do so--rather than when they switch to a running form--they will decelerate, sometimes seriously. This is where we see the field catch up to them. You keep the basic mechanic but change the timing and the force--and by not keeping those things perfect, you cannot even maintain the same speed, you will decelerate...versus the running motion, where you can essentially maintain very close to the same speed for an extended period. When sprinters transition to this running form and ease through the line, they call it cruising. "Cruising". Not "sprinting". "Cruising" is a sprinter's euphemism for "running".
The very best of all-time can meter their efforts over the first 50-60m, so that they can continue on well to 100m, maintaining the required power and timing demanded by the sprint form without decelerating--this approach and execution are known as "drive phase". How many times do you have to hear Carl Lewis say that he was "decelerating less than his opponents". Look at Greene, how many races did he win between 50 and 100m, by edging out his competition by not decelerating as much? Powell was the total master of the drive phase, which was why he almost never transitioned to running form, because he always had enough left in the tank to use sprint form through the line--and even at that, how many times did we see Powell subsequently crap out in major finals. Many people believe it was because he was mentally weak, but it is possible that maintaining sprint form through the line through rounds, and even twice in one day like semi's and then finals a few hours later, meant too much depletion. Also, how many times do you have to hear about "managing rounds" in a major? All that is about is minimizing the amount of time you spend during the rounds in true sprint form, which is why guys like Blake and Bolt were masters of majors. They would shut it down as early as possible.
Sometimes now you see guys like Kerley destroying the rounds, which can be fatal in a major, and very nearly cost Kerley the gold in the last WC. He beat Bromell by only 0.01, and Bracy by 0.02, and was very far off his times in the rounds. Absolutely terrible sprint form management, he maintained it through the line. 9.79 in the HEATS, never shutting down, even when he had it, terrible. He realized his error and backed off to 10.02 in the semi, which was all he needed to win--but only went 9.86 in the final, barely leaning ahead of Bromell in a time a full 0.10 slower than his time in the heat. Yes he still won, but there was no need for 9.76 in the heat. Then he had nothing left for the 200m, where he cramped up in the rounds and couldn't maintain sprint form for even the first 100m.
Easy to criticize, but even the best have only so much sprint in them over a short time frame. You have some guys like BJ who pumped themselves to the stratosphere to extend the time they could maintain sprint form, which was the only way he could win.
Sprinting is not running. The 400m is not ever done fast, or even at all, with true sprint form, except for maybe the acceleration phase or first turn--maybe, and most often not even then. It is not physically possible. It's like race cars--look at a dragster, they are totally different than anything else, and not infrequently they blow up before even their few-second race is finished, and often need a complete rebuild between races.
The 400 is the shortest middle distance, not a long sprint--even though it might feel like a sprint to some athletes who have no idea what an actual sprint feels like. It is not semantics, it is a substantive difference.
This is largely a matter of semantics. You’re not wrong but people may differ. A miler may feel almost as if he is sprinting all out in a 400m.
I don't think it's semantics, I think that running and sprinting are two different movements.
True sprinting is a series of takeoffs, while running is a series of takeoffs and landings. While a miler may "feel" like he is sprinting, "feel" has nothing to do with it. It is not about speed, it is not about fatigue, it is not about range of motion, it is not about pumping the arms, it is even not about keeping the knees high--it is about front-side action, with no/as little backside action as possible. You are in a power position when you strike, you are not absorbing shock. This requires specific form, strong specific musculature, high-speed muscular coordination, etc.. To a person who understands how to sprint, it "feels" absolutely nothing like running, it is very specific and totally different.
When people talk about a "long sprint", they are most often talking about a very fast run. A "long sprint" race can be somewhat of a hybrid, with some true sprint form early, followed by a transition to a fast run form. True sprint form is inefficient, but it is the only form that will permit maximum acceleration and maximum speeed. As distance increases, it becomes both very sub-optimal, and actually impossible to do with any speed, because its inefficiency very quickly leads to depletion at the high rate of output that is possible.
It's hard to describe the difference, however it is also why you can just look at someone and see if their form is suited to the 100m or not. Of course energy systems and neurology also play critical roles, and you can see some people with good 100m times who don't properly sprint, like Felix--who was a VERY fast runner. But when you look at the very top of the 100m ranks, you see people like SAFP, SCR, ETH, FloJo, who you can see actually have sprint form...and among the men, guys like Greene, BJ, Powell. Maybe the best illustration is FloJo--just watch her 100, and even her 200, and compare them to her 400. They are completely different motions, while for instance Felix's motions seem much more similar--and that is why Felix was never going to touch even 10.7, and maxxed out at 10.89 (+1.5); she was essentially a 11.0x runner at her best. Her second-best was 10.92 (+0.7), then 10.93(+1.5), then 10.96, 10.98, etc. By raw times you could say she was a mid-10.9 runner. The best 100m women are 10.6 or 10.7. Look even at Tianna Madison at 10.78 (+1.0), someone who had true sprint form.
Think about Kim Collins doing a 400m--do you think he could do it with that 100m form? Think what you will about his PB, but he got everything possible out of his body. While you may not think of him as that strong, the power he developed was enormous, if not the absolute force.
It is why Ackbar was never going to be a 100m star. IIRC it was something to do with his back that didn't permit the motion--so he became a very fast runner and dominated the 200 and 400, the 200 by having the best-ever second 100m, by far, using the more efficient fast running form. Compare him to his contemporary Bailey, who hit that 9.84 and might have hit 9.7 had it not been for all the false starts--look at that sprint form, and imagine him trying to do that for 400m.
We see some guys at the top, guys like Bolt, Blake, Gay, who could run extremely fast because they were jacked up, and because they had excellent sprint form to set them up for the fast running. Check out a guy like Blake, watch a quarter or a semi where he sprints to the lead, then "shuts it down" pretty far from the line...THAT is maybe your most graphic example of a shutting-down of sprint form, and an adoption of running form. Guys will shut down the sprint as soon as possible, because EVEN 100m is a long time to maintain a sprint form, and anything after 50m therefore comes with the possibility of injury, and the certainty of depletion. To talk about anybody maintaining a fast actual sprint for even 200m is outrageous, let alone for 400m.
Sometimes guys will shut it down and maintain a sprint form, but when they do so--rather than when they switch to a running form--they will decelerate, sometimes seriously. This is where we see the field catch up to them. You keep the basic mechanic but change the timing and the force--and by not keeping those things perfect, you cannot even maintain the same speed, you will decelerate...versus the running motion, where you can essentially maintain very close to the same speed for an extended period. When sprinters transition to this running form and ease through the line, they call it cruising. "Cruising". Not "sprinting". "Cruising" is a sprinter's euphemism for "running".
The very best of all-time can meter their efforts over the first 50-60m, so that they can continue on well to 100m, maintaining the required power and timing demanded by the sprint form without decelerating--this approach and execution are known as "drive phase". How many times do you have to hear Carl Lewis say that he was "decelerating less than his opponents". Look at Greene, how many races did he win between 50 and 100m, by edging out his competition by not decelerating as much? Powell was the total master of the drive phase, which was why he almost never transitioned to running form, because he always had enough left in the tank to use sprint form through the line--and even at that, how many times did we see Powell subsequently crap out in major finals. Many people believe it was because he was mentally weak, but it is possible that maintaining sprint form through the line through rounds, and even twice in one day like semi's and then finals a few hours later, meant too much depletion. Also, how many times do you have to hear about "managing rounds" in a major? All that is about is minimizing the amount of time you spend during the rounds in true sprint form, which is why guys like Blake and Bolt were masters of majors. They would shut it down as early as possible.
Sometimes now you see guys like Kerley destroying the rounds, which can be fatal in a major, and very nearly cost Kerley the gold in the last WC. He beat Bromell by only 0.01, and Bracy by 0.02, and was very far off his times in the rounds. Absolutely terrible sprint form management, he maintained it through the line. 9.79 in the HEATS, never shutting down, even when he had it, terrible. He realized his error and backed off to 10.02 in the semi, which was all he needed to win--but only went 9.86 in the final, barely leaning ahead of Bromell in a time a full 0.10 slower than his time in the heat. Yes he still won, but there was no need for 9.76 in the heat. Then he had nothing left for the 200m, where he cramped up in the rounds and couldn't maintain sprint form for even the first 100m.
Easy to criticize, but even the best have only so much sprint in them over a short time frame. You have some guys like BJ who pumped themselves to the stratosphere to extend the time they could maintain sprint form, which was the only way he could win.
Sprinting is not running. The 400m is not ever done fast, or even at all, with true sprint form, except for maybe the acceleration phase or first turn--maybe, and most often not even then. It is not physically possible. It's like race cars--look at a dragster, they are totally different than anything else, and not infrequently they blow up before even their few-second race is finished, and often need a complete rebuild between races.
The 400 is the shortest middle distance, not a long sprint--even though it might feel like a sprint to some athletes who have no idea what an actual sprint feels like. It is not semantics, it is a substantive difference.
Thank you for corroborating my point. This is largely a matter of semantics.