Mo Farah only 12.9 100m time in BBC Superstars Show

He clearly eased up with 30 meters to go. Look at his turnover.

OK ignore that.

17 strides in the last 5 seconds = 204 / minute.

No way 12.9 is 49 second 400m pace. 12.9 x 4 is 51.6

wineturtle wrote:

Any of you guys see Brian Oldfield sprint?

100 yard dash. Lynn Swann first at 10.23 and Oldfield second at 10.42, probably hand timed.

Slow motion begins at 3:36

The track is obviously short. It's only 5 lanes.

"probably hand timed"?

Did you even see the vid?

lol

pinoyathletics--

Not only is your post on this thread absolute garbage, so are all your other posts on this site, as far as I can tell.

Please go away, or improve your posting.

Unless it was sarcastic, in which case, you are the champ.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Who cares? I do, for one.

Why? Because it is fun and challenging, and that combination is important to me.

It's the same reason I run my shabby sub-20:00 5k's, and the same reason I still run track meets in my mid-40's.

It's the same reason a letsrun poster ran 2 miles every hour for 24 hours.

A competition is a competition, the mentality should be the same whether you run 12.9 or 9.9, and THAT is what it is all about.

Just ask Mo Farah--HE cared about his 100m time, because HE is a real competitor.

If Farah cared about his 100m time, he would train for that distance.

He really doesn't care, you need to wrap your mind around this.

Not every elite athlete is manic about having to compete at EVERYTHING. A lot of elites are happy crushing their competition in one event, and tipping their hat to them in another completely unrelated event. This understanding is what makes them specialists, and able to be the BEST at what they do.

Good for Mo getting a bit of fun in. Time to get back to real running.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

"probably hand timed"?

Did you even see the vid?

lol

Thought you'd get a kick out of that.

crazy raisin wrote:

body master wrote:

I seriously doubt he can run under 50 seconds. No f*ing way. He's too slow, too lean. Muscle is REQUIRED to not only sustain SPEED (not endurance) but also to PRODUCE speed. Farah cannot do either.

We already know he can sustain a speed of an 11.0 100m dash with a rolling start, from a workout he rain with Rupp. It is a lack of acceleration. He doesn't lose that much ground over the second 50m. 50.0 is not out of his range even if a low-12 100m is.

You don't lose 2 seconds on the start, but you do gain a few tenths hand your coach hand times you

RRRR--

Wrong. Mo CARED. About what? About doing his best.

Of course in the big picture he doesn't care about the 100 as much as he does about 5k/10k, but that in no way suggests that he didn't care about doing his best in THIS particular race.

OTOH, everything observable about the race suggests that he DID care about it.

That's what YOU are missing--the desire to do your best, no matter what the task. The particular task in this race, in the abstract, was to get the best placing possible.

The task in Mo's mind, however, was even bigger--to get as good a 100m time as possible. He never let up even when his place was secure, and he leaned at the tape. I'm absolutely certain that he would have leaned at the tape even if he had been in the lead by 10m.

He gave it all he had. He CARED, about doing the best he could.

And for that, he deserves your respect.

Agreed. And well said.

If that was the fastest he could run, then it emphasizes again that working on top sprint speed is counterproductive for a serious distance runner.

You think Mo doesn't work on his top speed?

No serious distance runner does anything conducive to sprinting, at all, because it would all be counterproductive to distance running.

While Mo certainly works on his speed endurance over short distances, it isn't sprinting, neither is it for any other serious distance runner. But I don't think it's possible to claim that working on speed endurance over short distances is not valuable to distance runners involved in competitive races.

What surprised me in the original post was that the OP described 12.9 as a "slow" time.

It's not at all slow, all things considered, IMHO. A 13-second 100m for an athlete whose training is not conducive to a fast 100m is VERY respectable.

Consider that he actually ran slower than 13 because the timing was not FAT. With RT and proper timing he was probably closer to 13.5 ANYWHERE between 13 and 13.5, for an athlete whose training militates AGAINST a fast 100m time, is terrific.

Consider also that he is VERY highly optimized for distance running, and therefore VERY poorly equipped for the 100m. 13-13.5 was run, as you guys love to say, on "pure hate", or "pure guts".

I ask again: when was the last time you saw an Olympic 100m champion run a 10,000m? Think about the modern-era medalists, in their Olympic form:

Bolt

Gatlin

Greene

Bailey

Christie

Johnson

Lewis

What do you think 10,000m times would be for these guys? I would venture to guess that relatively speaking, Mo's 13-second 100m is at least as good as any of them could do in a 10,000m, and probably better.

A 13-second 100m is NOT slow. You guys have become too conditioned to hearing 9.9x, 9.8x, 9.7x, etc. Go out and try the 100m in some hack track meet, with FAT. You will feel like you're flying, and you will be lucky to run 13 seconds.

Spit teaser - you just can't face the possibility that mo might actually be quite fast.

He's run 1.48 and 3.33. Whilst his endurance is first class, there's no way he could run these times without 400m ability of AT WORST 51s. You simply cannot run this fast without innate 100m speed of at least 12s.

Just think about this show -

1. It was wet and cold

2. He prob didn't thoroughly warm up - would have looked a dick

3. We don't know his current health / fitness

I see this as more of a 'training time'. In the right conditions, in peak shape he is sub 12 no doubt at all.

1.48 is 13.5 x 8..... BACK TO F***IN' BACK.

You are such a plonker.

Belgian Waffle wrote:

I think he was doing strides.

this

pussies

Boubatronic wrote:

Spit teaser - you just can't face the possibility that mo might actually be quite fast.

He's run 1.48 and 3.33. Whilst his endurance is first class, there's no way he could run these times without 400m ability of AT WORST 51s. You simply cannot run this fast without innate 100m speed of at least 12s.

Just think about this show -

1. It was wet and cold

2. He prob didn't thoroughly warm up - would have looked a dick

3. We don't know his current health / fitness

I see this as more of a 'training time'. In the right conditions, in peak shape he is sub 12 no doubt at all.

1.48 is 13.5 x 8..... BACK TO F***IN' BACK.

You are such a plonker.

I think the biggest thing all of you guys bashing the Geezer are missing is the start out of blocks. For a distance dude out of blocks you can likely add at least a second to what they could run with a flying start. Of course top end speed of Mo Farah is better than 13 seconds/100m and Sprintgeezer will readily admit that but that is not really what this race was. It was a REAL 100m. Bolt is more around a 9.00 guy by top speed BUT THAT IS NOT THE 100m RACE! YOU GOTTA ACCOUNT FOR THE BLOCKS!