We All Know What the Hardest Race Ever is, But What's the Easiest?

body master wrote:

This is absolutely ironic and hypocritical. The least time the runner has to struggle the easier the race? If we are talking about percent given of a race when have you ever seen a distance runner struggle for anything more than the finishing stages of a race? At BEST, 1/4 of the race they struggle.

In a sprint, even the BEST runners look like their struggling for the ENTIRE race. Look at Tyson Gay, probably the epitome of "struggling". His facial expressions are contorted from the most intense effort. Bolt's 200m world records? Teeth gritted the entire race in an effort to push faster.

At the end of the day you can become a great distance runner from just hard practices alone. You can never do that and become a great sprinter.

"Percent" of a given race is completely irrelevant when the race is as short as 100m.

Ask ANY person out there whether they would rather run a mile or sprint 100m. Regardless of whether you pick a runner, soccer player, football player, physicist, math major, 4th grader, babysitter, stay-at-home-mom, etc. the answer will ALWAYS be 100m.

And why is that?

Because it's a damn easier run.

body master wrote:

This is absolutely ironic and hypocritical. The least time the runner has to struggle the easier the race? If we are talking about percent given of a race when have you ever seen a distance runner struggle for anything more than the finishing stages of a race? At BEST, 1/4 of the race they struggle.

In a sprint, even the BEST runners look like their struggling for the ENTIRE race. Look at Tyson Gay, probably the epitome of "struggling". His facial expressions are contorted from the most intense effort. Bolt's 200m world records? Teeth gritted the entire race in an effort to push faster.

At the end of the day you can become a great distance runner from just hard practices alone. You can never do that and become a great sprinter.

Dood, don't be a freaking jackwagon. Everybody trains hard and gets better from hard practices. Why don't you run a 100 meters and then run a 10k and tell me which one is harder? The longer races hurt more because the body breaks down more the longer it operates. duh. what hurts a car more, a quick quarter mile at top speed or racing the doggone daytona 500?

And to suggest that there is no strategy in a long-distance race would suggest that you are not a distance runner and that you are also a moron. Please rewatch the last 800 of the most recent olympic 5k to see strategy

Anyone can "run" 100m, but that's like saying the 400m isn't hard because anyone can run it. When races are run like they are supposed to it's a different story.

I found that the fitter I got, the easier it was to run the next distance up.

The 100 was difficult because you had to time the start and get the right angle out of the blocks without standing up too quickly.

Keep everything moving in a forward direction. You can't maintain full speed the whole way so it becomes about form and composure the last 40m.

So many ways to make a mistake that can cost you the race. You can't make up for any mistake.

I liked the 200 because there was less pressure on the start and more time to make up ground. The training is very similar. But improving is tough and limited.

With proper training, the 400 is easier then the 200 because there is a float period and you are never really full out. But it really hurts.

The 800 is very difficult to pace and mistakes are costly because you no longer have your own lane.

I found the 1500 to be the easiest once I gained that kind of fitness. You are just biding your time in the first half of the race in a quick but controlled pace. Lot's of chances to make moves. The training is tough but the race is easier than others.

The longer races feel pretty easy for the majority of the distance. The pain accumulates and you have to endure that for a good finish.

I've raced them all from 100m to 10K land found the mile/1500 the easiest.

I don't doubt the marathon to be tough.

Not counting the 60 and such, the 100 has the "distinction" of being the only race that is run at a slower pace than longer races. Excepting Bolt, nearly all sprinters run the 200 at a faster pace than the 100.

This is an objective measure that would argue that the 100 is the easiest race, there is no other race that is simultaneously shorter and run more slowly, in the vast majority of cases, as is the case with the 100m.

My conclusion, the 100m is the easiest because it is too short to max out the capabilities it takes to be successful at the discipline.

However, this also likely would make it more tactical. But, sadly, for sprinters, this is not the case. There are no turns and you are in a dedicated lane the entire time.

You don't race the 100m, you participate at the same time.

What runner X does has no direct implication for any of the other runners.

half

too long to have to 5k pace but not a marathon [which we know is more then 2x half]

a 10k is just 2x5ks so it sucks

half you can relax a bit

but thats just me

400 sucks 800 too

The 100m has been discussed a lot here, I'll just throw in my two cents as to why it's not that easy.

Pretty much every time I'm on the starting line I am thankful I'm not a sprinter, because the start doesn't matter. You don't need lightning quick reflexes, you can't lose the race in the first 0.2 seconds.

In the 100m you have approximately 10 seconds to make it or break it. I already posted the mile as my "easiest" (if you have enough speed), because the first lap is pretty much chill. You have to run well the second and third laps, but by then you're already minutes into the race, the nerves are long gone, and you're in a good rhythm. As long as you're fit, you can't really mess it up.

Distance runners like to think of the 100m dash as "100% all-out," but that's not really true. Look at 10m splits - they aren't all the same, you still have bursts of speed here and there. Even more true in the 200m.

If you think about it, who is going to have the easiest time winning his event at USA's?

Galen Rupp just has to jog with the leaders for 24 laps, hope his allergies don't flare up, and put in a good kick.

Even if Tyson Gay were a heavy, heavy favorite, in the blink of an eye, a false start, a bad start, a few bad strides, it could all be over. Which guy's shoes would you rather be in?

Not true - 10.00 seconds has been bettered 608 times. 20.00, only 222 times.

Every step of the 100 is run at an equal or faster pace than the 200. The reason 100m times are sometimes slower is because that start, which is the slowest part of both races, takes up a larger percentage of the 100m dash.

Care to explain what the heck that means?

Clearly you don't actually know any sprinters...

Sprints are clearly the easiest. The races aren't nearly as painful as long distance races are. Plus their workouts are a breeze compared to long distance workouts.

fgrgfrfsreafecedvc wrote:

Sprints are clearly the easiest. The races aren't nearly as painful as long distance races are. Plus their workouts are a breeze compared to long distance workouts.

Are you kidding? I've seen distance practices that were just 8 easy miles. How can practice be more of a breeze than that?

crazy raisin wrote:

Are you kidding? I've seen distance practices that were just 8 easy miles. How can practice be more of a breeze than that?

I've seen sprint practices that consist of a one-lap warmup, and then 4 x 300m with 10 minutes rest in between.

I'll just point out that any runner who can run 8 miles can also run 4 x 300m at max speed for as long as he can hold it with 10 minutes rest in between.

Now, let's ignore the practice that I've pointed out because there's likely going to be a lot of people claiming that whatever school they went to would never have a practice like that.

In all seriousness, there is no distance runner who will not be able to complete a sprint practice. Let's take for example, a sprint practice that consists of a warmup, practicing starts, and a weight room session, and throw a distance guy in there. The distance guy's starts may suck, and he may not be able to lift as much, but he'll make it through the workout just fine to the best of his capabilities (for example, if the average team sprinter completes 5 x 15 reps of 150 lbs, the distance guy might only be able to get 5 x 15 reps of 130 lbs, but the point is, he'll do it)

If you throw a group of 100m runners into an 8-mile run, they'll be dying at the end of it no matter what pace they go. The slowest distance guy on the team might be running 8:30/mile, but I guarantee the sprinter will be running 9:00/mile or slower and STILL fail to go the full distance.

oh pleaseee wrote:

Bull. How often do you see sprinters doubling and tripling in events? All the time. How often do you see elite distance runners even doubling in say 800/1500 or 5k/10k? Rarely. Much harder on your body. The intensity is higher in sprinting but it's for a very brief period.

rofl? What a terrible point. First, you mention elite runners so i don't see any sprinters that can "triple" in individual events. And secondly, distance runners double all the time.

The point is horrible because the great discrepancy between 100m and 200m doubling vs 800 to 1500, 5k/10k doubling. Any 100m runner can do the 200m well as long as they can run a good bend.

Just stop posting. You know nothing about the sport.

OF COURSE any distance runner can complete a sprint workout. And most sprinters can't comlete a distance workout. That means NOTHING. What you SHOULD ask yourself is what do distance runners consider the hardest workouts? The LONG workouts or the SPEED workouts? Any distance runner will tell you the speed workouts are harder. Relative to how slow they are compared to real sprinters, its a safe bet to say that sprint workouts are harder than distance workouts.

crazy raisin wrote:

If you think about it, who is going to have the easiest time winning his event at USA's?

Galen Rupp just has to jog with the leaders for 24 laps, hope his allergies don't flare up, and put in a good kick.

Even if Tyson Gay were a heavy, heavy favorite, in the blink of an eye, a false start, a bad start, a few bad strides, it could all be over. Which guy's shoes would you rather be in?

Thank you. End of thread.

bladlkfjsdfs wrote:

Not counting the 60 and such, the 100 has the "distinction" of being the only race that is run at a slower pace than longer races. Excepting Bolt, nearly all sprinters run the 200 at a faster pace than the 100.

This blah blah blah blah.

My conclusion, blah blah blah

However, this also likely would make it more blah blah blah

You don't race the yada yada yada.

Another letsrunner who doesn't know sprints. Typical. The 100 IS run at a faster pace than any other race, even the 60m. You reach a top speed at around 60m that you can only sustain for about 15meters. Put it this way, no race has a faster 10m split in it then the 100m dash.

This is merely a matter of common sense people. Quantity vs quality. Quantity (distance running) can NEVER break the body down like quality (sprinting) can.

Science already proves this. The marker of muscle breakdown, creatine kinase, is HIGHER after a maximal intensity (sprinting) workout then it is after a moderate intensity workout (longer distance).

Honestly though, that's not even on topic as we are talking about race versus training. Let's just put the training BS to rest.

I'll just say that I started off running the 100 and kept moving up because it was easier to do so.

And less competitive.

Training is irrelevant in this discussion about racing.

It's easy to run a 100 slow.

Hard to win.

Just stop. Any runner or non-runner at any distance or skill level will tell you that racing a 100 is easier than racing a mile. Does the 100 require a great deal of skill and precise execution? Of course. But distance races require an equal amount of skill in other areas, and they are more physically painful and psychologically demanding.

people around me always say steeple is the hardest... I would probably agree. I honestly don't think the 800 is that bad, but I also never focused on it specifically.