I ask former 400 m world record holder Butch Reynold how he ran. He said even splits....just as I figured was best. So don't listen to me, listen to the former World Record Holder. You don not have to get out. You have to be steady and finish.
Butch Reynolds did NOT run even splits in his WR. Look it up and learn something.
But lets be honest, it really really really depends on the course.
For the most part, if:
-the field chokes the course due to too many entrants versus lane width
-heavy rain and ground condition deterioration in the style of european cross
-significant elevation changes cause larger than flat course pace changes
Then:
Getting out hard and clinging to the pack appropriate to your ability is strategically helpful.
But for the most part, if its a wide open, cool, dry and sunny US golf course then reserved pacing relative to "out hard" idiots and a faster close with nothing preventing it is strategically smarter.
This excellent photo of a 1994 cross country race in england recently shared on facebook would be an example of needing to get out hard.
Here's just a quick example of things... only one race but might illustrate a point.
West regionals last year -women's side.
18 runners went out between 7:20-7:30: 17 of them finished in the top 20. The 18th was in the top 25
34 runners went out between 7:30 -7:40: 3 were in the top 20 (highest was 15th). only 7 from this group was outside the top 60. and all were in the top 90.
Seems like most of those in this race who went out hard did okay.
Only one race but I'd guess many top races are similar.
IMO "getting out" is the most overrated, and wrong headed thinking of most xc coaches.
My coach always told me to get out medium. I figured it was a good idea, and I thought, "dang, he is a good coach!". But one day he told me to get out extra medium. I had no idea what to do after that.
800 might be an exception, and I'm not very good, but I ran the same time 3 times in a row by running exactly even, or even slightly negative splits. Ran with a 4 second positive split next race and went 1 second faster, and felt like I had another second to go.
When high school and college coaches grow brains aka never
No, it is when runners heed the advice to not go out with the idiots who are setting themselves up to flame out. I always tell my runners to let the idiots go, and pass them as they die off.
I ask former 400 m world record holder Butch Reynold how he ran. He said even splits....just as I figured was best. So don't listen to me, listen to the former World Record Holder. You don not have to get out. You have to be steady and finish.
Butch Reynolds did NOT run even splits in his WR. Look it up and learn something.
Even if he did, it’s irrelevant. A race to entirely in lanes has different considerations than a race run with 300 people all competing for the same tangent line.
Time and time again highschool/club and sometimes college coaches are telling athletes to get out hard so they can get a good position, and while there are situations where this can be applicable (think bottlenecks, tight funnel) inevitably this is hurting the athletes races.
If an athlete wants to take a race hard from the start, by all means they should, but in no instance should the first stretch be faster than any other stretch. Using the analogy of a car, when you accelerate really fast from 0-60 you burn much more gas then if you use the slow burn to bring it up to 60. Jakob can be used as a study for his tactics that were used in the 1500m final of the Olympics. While championship tactics vary from other races, in this race he went out hard, and got 4th. However when we see him going out behind a pacer, he clearly can knock out some fast times.
Should "fast out of the gate" still be a philosophy in coaching?
Shotput.
You should get out fast at all distances. Physiologically there is no price to pay for that first 10 sec. Its literally free energy. See: "Alactic" It's a win-win, you pay no price and you get out of traffic and gain a sec or two .
Time and time again highschool/club and sometimes college coaches are telling athletes to get out hard so they can get a good position, and while there are situations where this can be applicable (think bottlenecks, tight funnel) inevitably this is hurting the athletes races.
If an athlete wants to take a race hard from the start, by all means they should, but in no instance should the first stretch be faster than any other stretch. Using the analogy of a car, when you accelerate really fast from 0-60 you burn much more gas then if you use the slow burn to bring it up to 60. Jakob can be used as a study for his tactics that were used in the 1500m final of the Olympics. While championship tactics vary from other races, in this race he went out hard, and got 4th. However when we see him going out behind a pacer, he clearly can knock out some fast times.
Should "fast out of the gate" still be a philosophy in coaching?
Shotput.
Its unclear from your first paragraph and some of the responses whether you are talking about getting off the line full blast for 8-10 sec or the first mile? The former is a no brainer, the latter I guess your fist mile should always be a few sec faster? Esp if you got off the line quick. But I would agree that efficiency and close to even splits is the way to go. But there is something to be said for the mind-body interaction of staying with the pack if it kills ya assuming you are close to that level..
As a high school coach of successful teams (2nd in state two years ago), this concept has always been intriguing to me to think about. I believe in what most have said about running even splits to win the race, especially in the postseason, when athletes get to top of the state level or faster. But high school kids, especially those inexperienced with running are interesting cats! I've seen a ton of kids who run slower than 16 minutes that hold themselves back in races. They run way slower than what their workouts say they are capable of. In some cases telling them to go out slow can validate their fears of the races and make it even harder to get them running what they are capable of.
My strategy has always been to have athletes go out a little uncomfortably fast and learn a lesson early in the season. Then they are more prepared for that time they have to go out with and hold come the end of the season. I've seen tons of kids rip the bandaid off and PR by a minute or more going out hard and dying! I think it resets what their brain believes is possible when it comes to how bad they can hurt.
This has been especially true in races like 400, 800, 1600 in track. Kids must find out what they are capable of before they learn to even split.
I remember when I was in high school and after when I helped out coaching, the thinking was always to make the first mile "fast but relaxed." I think most high school athletes naturally get out fast because of nerves, inexperience, and just on the whole being better speed athletes than endurance athletes. In a big invitational for a high school kid, it can be a pretty stressful ride to be buried in a pack and try to move up, which can make a split that seems even or slow actually cost a lot more than it should. I think most kids feel comfortable getting out fairly hard and then finding their spot to settle and riding that momentum to a fast, relaxed first mile.
800 might be an exception, and I'm not very good, but I ran the same time 3 times in a row by running exactly even, or even slightly negative splits. Ran with a 4 second positive split next race and went 1 second faster, and felt like I had another second to go.
The optimal way to run the 400 and 800 is about a 2-3 second positive split, which uses your anaerobic energy most effectively. In more aerobic events (1500 and up), even splits become more efficient (or slightly negative splits if you have a good kick). So yes, the 800 is an exception.
You should get out fast at all distances. Physiologically there is no price to pay for that first 10 sec. Its literally free energy. See: "Alactic" It's a win-win, you pay no price and you get out of traffic and gain a sec or two .
This is certainly not correct. That initial blast of ATP may not adversely affect you in those first few moments while going from 0 to race speed, but an excessive early effort during this time can overtly tax your muscles and aerobic system in a way that adversely affects your effort throughout the rest of the race and can cost you time overall.
In high school cross country there are many times where it is highly important to get out fast. There are plenty of courses where it is physically impossible to make up very much ground due to the width of the course and the number of racers. Additionally, many high school runners are notoriously bad at pacing and will judge their pace based off the runners around them, so the faster they start the faster they run because they are surrounded by faster runners.
Here's just a quick example of things... only one race but might illustrate a point.
West regionals last year -women's side.
18 runners went out between 7:20-7:30: 17 of them finished in the top 20. The 18th was in the top 25
34 runners went out between 7:30 -7:40: 3 were in the top 20 (highest was 15th). only 7 from this group was outside the top 60. and all were in the top 90.
Seems like most of those in this race who went out hard did okay.
Only one race but I'd guess many top races are similar.
And here's more so that I can get more down votes...
35 started between 7:40 and 7:50...
9 finished between 35 -49
14 finished between 50-74
8 finished between 75-99
4 finished in 100-120
Some notes... of the 87 who went out the fastest 83 of them finished in the top 100.
No one who went out in the 7:40-7:50 group finished higher than 35.
81 of the 87 who went out the fastest finished in the top 90.
Sorta looks like if you want to be in the top 'whatever' you need to be in or close to that position fairly early in the race. Probably doesn't mean you have to be winning at 100m.
Certainly some did go out faster than they should have but it seems that somewhere between 85-90% who 'got out hard' did okay.