Lemaitre's start STILL sucks, even though he won French indoors

Sprintgeezer wrote:

As for muscle development, my understanding is the same as a combination of that of gastric bypass and junk master.

Both Lemaitre and Ndure should call me after the Olympics, I can take them where they need to go...cleanly.

Either that or they should just keep taking advice from their apparent mentor, Mr. Herman.

Ndure is an America now, and I doubt theres anything you could do for him. He is slowly training for a change into 400m, which is most likely the distance he is best suited for. In fact, if he shows truly great sprint endurance he can be extremely fast at 400m. We'll see.

over there wrote:

"Also, no good middle-distance guy is fast by sprinting standards."

so would a 9.4 and a 20.7 in the 60s be 'fast by sprinting standards?'

Depends... relativelly speaking 20.7 was lot faster back then so I suppouse it could be considered fast however what middle distance guy back in the 60's could run under 10, 21? 9.4, 20.7?

Sure top md guys are "fast", to be at the md top you have to be pretty "fast" but just not pure "sprinter fast", they wouldnt be top md guys anyways if they had top sprinter speed, their other qualities would suffer. (generally speaking).

Steve Haas

I know another mid guy from 60s who ran 45.6r

Would've been interesting if they had actually trained for sprints -

Is Ndure really switching to the 400m? When? He's actually gotten substantially better in the 200m; he's probably #6 or #7 right now, and #5 or #6 if Lemaitre's 19.80 was a lucky one-off, and #4 or #5 if Gay isn't back below 20.

Is his 400m speed endurance really any good? I'd like to see him try, for sure.

uk--

Do you seriously believe that Lemaitre wouldn't benefit significantly from a heavy weight program in the 100m?

Those British guys aren't "slow" because they are doing too many weights.

First, they're not "slow" at all, for clean sprinters; second, they could very well be even slower than they are, were they to not do so many weights; third, I see no particular evidence that they are too heavy, with the exception of HA-A.

Check out these front views of both Lemaitre 9.92 and Powell 9.74:

Lemaitre 9.92 at 15 seconds -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66WhOgZTo1k

Powell 9.74 at 3:20 -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_tp1V3ikbQ

Even check out Bolt in his 9.69, at 0 seconds:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5v9eQ1twQs

To me, this is some of the best evidence of Lemaitre's "mechanicalism", as opposed to Powell's and Bolt's "trained naturalism".

Ultimately, at the start, you want to produce maximum acceleration down the direction of the track, which requires maximum force in that direction--the question is how to achieve this maximum force.

A simplistic mechanistic approach would be to say that there should be as little lateral motion as possible, at all times, to permit maximum efficiency--but efficiency is only a secondary goal; the primary goal is maximum force. Efficiency at the start is of course important so that you have more left for later in the 100m race--and if you watch how Lemaitre runs the 100, he is clearly more efficient, energetically, at the start, which leaves him with enough energy to blow away most people in the last 40m--almost all of his body motion is directed along the direction of the track.

Watch Powell and Bolt, though, and you will notice lateral motion--greatest on the first step, progressing to a minimum in the maintenance phase. Note that the amount of lateral motion is directly proportional to the magnitude of the acceleration, and hence to the magnitude of the force down the track.

The point is that even though a smaller proportion of Bolt's and Powell's total force production is directed in the direction of the track, the absolute magnitude of that force down the track is greater than is Lemaitre's.

Of course this lateral motion is a requirement, since we are bipedal and neither our footfalls on acceleration, nor our individual legs, are exactly in the center of the body...even Lemaitre's first footfall is just a bit outside the lateral envelope of the blocks--but his subsequent footfalls are very centered, unlike Powell's and Bolt's, which gradually progress to being more centered.

Lemaitre needs to stop thinking simplistically. He can still think rationally, though--look at the best guys and see what they do, and figure out why they do it, and how it is to their benefit. It's surprising to me that certain sprinters don't "feel" this type of thing instinctively. These are the kinds of guys who can be incredibly fast, but who never have starts worth talking about.

Like Lemaitre.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Is Ndure really switching to the 400m? When? He's actually gotten substantially better in the 200m; he's probably #6 or #7 right now, and #5 or #6 if Lemaitre's 19.80 was a lucky one-off, and #4 or #5 if Gay isn't back below 20.

Is his 400m speed endurance really any good? I'd like to see him try, for sure.

Well, maybe not switching, at least not this year. His main focus in 2012 is the 200m, but he is starting the season with a couple of 400m and have done several on training, something he have never done before. Substantially better? He ran 19.89 in 2007 and 19.95 last year. Its clear that he has potential for faste rthan 19.80, but injuries have held him back. Personally I hope he will switch to 400ms next year.

His 19.89 in Stuttgart corrects to a 19.99, and his 19.95 in Daegu corrects to a 20.01, so he's about the same.

What I meant was that he has always been mid-20.x, except for that anomaly in 2007, but then dropped a good .2 in 2010, and a further .3 in 2011, which is an encouraging trend.

The average of his bests from the last 2 years was around 20.12, but the average of his bests from the previous 6 was probably around 20.50 or 20.55 - plus, in 2011 he went under 20 twice, going 19.95 and 19.97, whereas in 2007 his next-best time was 20.25, with nothing else under 20.5, I think.

I think he's substantially better, yes--especially because he seems to be delivering when it counts. I've h@ted Ndure for years--he has such incredible natural speed, I always thought that if he just worked on it more diligently he could be truly great, but he just seemed like a goof-off.

I think that he got it together last year, though, so I wouldn't be surprised to see improvements from him again this year. If things hold true to form, with a law of diminishing returns, if he drops another .10-.15, he will be down around 19.85-19.80

I would not be surprised at all to see 19.85 from him this year

Ndure looks more cut. I thought a few years back he looked a little chunky and now he is looking a bit leaner. He is with HSI now and I don't not know how long he has been with them. I am going to presume that they are putting him through the same kind of lifting and technical work that Jeter is going through/has gone through and that could be the reason for the drops.

As for CL. I like watching him race because he gives you a lot of things that you can demonstrate and teach but I also cringe a little because at times I think he looks a little to stiff and mechanical. The only exception is his head. I think it moves way to much. He needs more stability in the neck and head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsszSJOKVhQ&feature=related

I don't know enough about sprint form to see if he's mechanical, but I do know that if he is, lifting heavy will tend to make him tight in the hips.

I'd recommend some heavy lifting, specifically dead lifts where the bar is dropped at the top instead of lowering it, with a full body explosive exercise; the one I'm thinking of in particular was a favorite of Vasily Alekseyev's-- He'd load a barbell up and take it outside and repeatedly throw it as high as he could over his head, over and over.

no one wrote:

Steve Haas

I know another mid guy from 60s who ran 45.6r

Would've been interesting if they had actually trained for sprints -

Yeah, maybe a couple of freaks could pull it off I dont think they would be top 100m guys though but certainly top 400m guys (45.6 is superb for a md guy anyways).

He has big problems with his legs when he lifts heavy. CL, that is.

What big problems with his legs?

How can anyone run as fast as he can and have big problems with his legs lifting?

All I can think of is if he's getting strains, he REALLY needs to lift more, learn correct form, start with high/moderate reps to build proprioception.

Junk Master wrote:

What big problems with his legs?

How can anyone run as fast as he can and have big problems with his legs lifting?

All I can think of is if he's getting strains, he REALLY needs to lift more, learn correct form, start with high/moderate reps to build proprioception.

+1

I'm a long time sprint fan probably about as long as you. Do you really is running a 100/200 as being all that complex? Not trying to be a wise azz...honest.

CLs start is relatively poor because his turnover is slow. Turnover is slow because of his build. He has relatively longer calves

I still think he can run 19.70

At the elite level, even at the national level maybe, you have to think of it as complex, because a mere .01 can be the difference between 1st and 2nd place, going to the Games or not going, or qualifying for nationals or not, or medaling, or not.

Think about it: .01 "Running naturally" is over-rated...every sprinter in the modern era who has ever been great has been highly trained, and has had a good coach around who tweaked parts of their race.

Running fast isn't complicated, if you're a fast runner--however, running to your full potential, and increasing your performance envelope, are complicated, when the race is as quick and energy-intensive as a 100 or 200.

Especially the 100. I have always said that with the exception of Ben Johnson and his first 10m, an athlete cannot "win" a 100m race, but that the 100m race can only be lost.

The 200m is a bit different--an athlete can definitely work to win that race, as Blake did in last year's final in Daegu, when he switched gears as he was about to get passed by Dix. The fact that he had another gear to switch into tells you that the 200 is a much more tactical race than is the 100--or at least that the tactics can be implemented through will.

In the 100 they must be implemented through training, and training must be very specific. Look at a guy like Jimmy Vicaut--he has fantastic native speed. If he had any coaching worth talking about, he would be running low-9.90 already...or, if he is impossible to coach, then he should switch to the 200 immediately.

Whether you like the USA or not, it is undeniable that we have some excellent sprint coaches here--which is why internationals come here to train. It's not for the weather or the food or the pharmacy, it's for the coaching.

And those coaching methodologies, and the types of races they produce, have been exported to different countries around the world. Why? Because they work. And they are anal.

It takes a whole life's endeavor to produce a 100m champion--and I'm talking about the coach's life, not just the athlete's. Except for one in a million, a good athlete will never be great without a great coach.

There are some, I will grant you that--Bob Hayes and Usain Bolt come to mind...guys who would win a 100m race if no athlete ever received any coaching, and they took us naked out of the jungle, put us on a track and said "run from here to there when you hear the gun".

But if totally uncoached, even they would lose against a well-coached Tyson Gay.

Well, except maybe for Hayes, who was the best 100m guy ever.

Anyway, yes, it is that complicated at the highest levels.

A race can always be over-thought, however, and then you end up with a racer like Lemaitre. He needs better coaching and training, so that he doesn't have to think as hard.

You read my mind, I was thinking about Hayes and Houston McTear. If you watch Owens back in the 30's (sure you've seen the videos) he looks pretty solid to me.

That was a good read bro, thanx.

Avante wrote:

I'm a long time sprint fan probably about as long as you. Do you really is running a 100/200 as being all that complex? Not trying to be a wise azz...honest.

I think this is it really.

People try too hard to make it into some sort of technical event.