Which is easier, getting a sprinter to become an OK distance runner, or getting a distance runner to become an OK sprinter?

Rockstar Games wrote:

Of course a 30:00 guy can run 12.5 for a FAT 100m. To run 30:00 you need to be reasonably fast anyway (14:20, 8:20, 3:55 at 5000m, 3000m and 1500m most likely). After a couple practice with starting blocks and sprint workouts he should be able to do it..

No Brownlee Bros ran 14xx for 100m in superstars in 14xx one has run sub 29/ Even if you knock a second off their sprint times 12.5 is not happening

Bad Wigins wrote:

this and this wrote:

I believe you can convert fast twitch to slow twitch but doing the reverse is much more difficult if not impossible.

Do you also believe you have a static number of muscle fibers, with none being created or destroyed?

Muscle fiber type has little or nothing to do with achieving a time as pedestrian as 12.50 anyhow. It's almost all form and learning to run with higher cadence and a more open stride and higher leg speed at footstrike. Leg speed meaning the foot has to be moving faster relative to the center of mass at footstrike to be at rest relative to the ground. Distance runners don't understand this and are limited by braking forces.

Nonsense

Almost all form - no its leg turnover and power

When it comes down to speed you cant put in what god left out- Sam Mussabini coach to Abrahams who won OG and 800m/1500m gold medalist Hill.

this and this wrote:

according to usatf decathlon scoring calculator

12.5 100 is 556 pts

5:00 1500 is 560 pts.

So the sub 5 1500 is very slightly more difficult to achieve.

i think it is much harder to get a sprinter to run sub 5 1500. The reason is not so much physiological but psychological. They would not want to do the training.

But there are some distance runners who have great endurance but do not have any fast twitch fibers. Physiologically they

just can't go sub 12.5.

I believe you can convert fast twitch to slow twitch but doing the reverse is much more difficult if not impossible.

That's because the decathlon is 90% a power/ sprint event, no way are they any where near equal

Flatrunner123 wrote:

IAAF scoring tables put a 12.5 at 895 points, and a 4:59.97 1500 at 772, so it would appear that the 1500 is "easier". A 1500 worth 895 points is a 4:41.56.

That's closer to reality

You don't realise wrote:

LIke really bro wrote:

No elite distance runner needs to "train" to break 12.5. That's the stupidest thing I've ever read. Train to break 11, yes, but they can all easily run 12.5. You realize how incredible slow 12.5 is.

Mo Farah ran 12.98 from blocks and was beaten handily by Antony Joshua and a high jumper.

He was just ahead of a swimmer and behind the swimmer was 14:00/29:xx running Brownlee brother.

28:32 for Alistair Brownlee

Exactly and even if you use all the excuses and get his time down to 12.4 How many 30 min 10km runners are as fast as Mo?

kartelite wrote:

kartelite wrote:

My 5k PR was just under 15, and my 800/1500 were 1:59/4:02 and my one open 400m was 53.66 (set less than a year after the 5k and 800m times when I'd basically stopped training).

What's more, I actually placed 5th of 9 in the 400m that day (it was a pretty bad D3 meet), and beat people in each of the high jump (hurdle style, btw I can still dunk at 34 how many of your sprinters can do that), long jump, and 400m hurdles even though I'd never done them before. I placed 2nd in the 5k also in around 17:20, so yeah it was basically like a mediocre HS meet the fact is a distance runner can still step down to those distances but I highly doubt your 11.0 sprinter could have moved up and beaten a single person in the 5k without a lick of training for it.

Perhaps you should have stuck to the 400m I've seen guys run 1:53 off 53xxx

I know a guy who ran 47 and sub-1:50, so a 400/800 guy. As a masters runner now in his mid 40s, he runs mile races in the 4:20s, and marathons around 2:35.

Might be shorting him a second in the 400, so maybe he was 46/1:48.

WilttheStilt wrote:

Athletes that earn 100s of millions $$$ are talented in explosive power.

So, your definition of sport involves money. Interesting.

Explosive power usually is also a good measure for how well one can balance and is also a good indicator of ball skills.

Let me guess: just because you say so.

Distance guys, save for 800 & 1500, don't have this athletic gift. They are good at endurance and their sport doesn't require balance at all, just perpetual forward motion.

Unlike the 100m.

Rockstar Games wrote:

Imagine Bekele at a 100m Olympic final or Michael Johnson in the Olympic 10km.

Without starting blocks (which should not be allowed in any case as the track races are supposed to be over flat surfaces and these flat surfaces should not have articial additions on them that help propel runners forward - the IAAF need to change the rules ASAP) I think Bekele in his prime may well have a better chance in a sprint race as the artificial explosiveness gained from the starting block will be neutralized and the pure natural runner will be competeing on more even (quite literally) playing field.

Check out all these decathletes easily breaking 5 for 1500m:

https://www.iaaf.org/results/iaaf-world-championships-in-athletics/2017/iaaf-world-championships-london-2017-5151/men/decathlon/1500-metres/result

Bad Wigins wrote:

Twitching wrote:

Fast twitch muscles can be converted to slow twitch, but slow twitch cannot convert to fast twitch.

Once again, get an Fing clue people. Muscle tissue is created and destroyed all the time. You don't need to "convert" one to the other, bro. And it doesn't matter anyhow to run 12.50, you don't need to be Captain Type 2X. You just need to understand how to sprint.

Go ahead folks, come at me with your denial and your spite, you know I'm right. You can't stand it, but you know it. Let out your frustration and then you can submit happily to my wisdom.

Muscle tissue is NOT "created and destroyed all the time." Muscle cells are end-differentiated (like neurons) and there is only minor stem cell division of 'satellite cells.' I think you meant to say that muscles undergo microtrauma through training which stimulates biochemical adaptations.

Yes similar to the 100. Except the distance guys will trip out of the blocks or just fall from not being able to quickly balance while trying to "accelerate". Meanwhile, the 10p guy will probably be moving over to the horizontal jump pits for their next athletic event...

kartelite wrote:

A typical 11.0 100m guy would probably run about 7 minutes for the mile

Sprinters are much faster in the mile than what you'd expect. They don't just sprint and lift, they also do extensive tempo work and circuit training.

Our HS 4x100 "B" squad lost a friendly 4x400 race against our top distance guys last year. The losing team had to run a mile. The sprinters were in the 12.1-12.4 range (FAT) for the 100. Their 400 splits were 57-59, so they were clearly better in the 100 than in the longer distances.

Since they lost, the sprinters ran the mile. They wore trainers and were all in the 6:20-6:30 range, and I doubt they were going all out. A typical 11.0 100 guy can probably run sub 6 with ease.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Twitching wrote:

Fast twitch muscles can be converted to slow twitch, but slow twitch cannot convert to fast twitch.

Once again, get an Fing clue people. Muscle tissue is created and destroyed all the time. You don't need to "convert" one to the other, bro. And it doesn't matter anyhow to run 12.50, you don't need to be Captain Type 2X. You just need to understand how to sprint.

Go ahead folks, come at me with your denial and your spite, you know I'm right. You can't stand it, but you know it. Let out your frustration and then you can submit happily to my wisdom.

+1

Very dumb question, I bet 90% of 30:00 minute 10k runners can run faster than 12.5 for the 100m, maybe even 95-99%

A 5:00 1500 is about a 5:20-25 mile, most 11.00 100m guys can run that within 1-3 months training, some can do it with than specific training

* with no specific training

You are wrong. We are a product of our T-level, build and training.

Were Miruts Yifter & Thomas Wessinghage fast twitch or slow twitch?

Both men were sub-49/sub-13:15 men.