can you sprint-fans please shut up. This is a very-obviously distance runner who crushed 11.00 out of blocks as a teenager. Yeah most distance guys at a high level won't break 11 - but ALL can break 12.
those are the facts.
buckminster badger wrote:
http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/country=pol/athcode=204111/index.htmlcan you sprint-fans please shut up. This is a very-obviously distance runner who crushed 11.00 out of blocks as a teenager. Yeah most distance guys at a high level won't break 11 - but ALL can break 12.
those are the facts.
One guy. An 800 runner who's never run an olympic qualifiying time in a 1500.Let alone an actual distance event.
subfive wrote:
World champion class distance runners are the best all around runners. Let's think about the top 10 sprinters from IAAF annual list and see if any one of them could perform equally in a range of race distances from the 100m to the marathon as the top 10 marathoners. We could use 11.0 100M as base, which is equal to a 846 in the IAAF scoring tables. I've listed equivalent times in the other races. Who would do the best overall.... a sprinter or distance runner?
Time Sprinter Distance runner
11.00 yes maybe
22.29 yes maybe
49.77 yes probably
1:55.3 maybe YES
4:16.1 NO YES
14:48:15 NO YES
31:19:36 NO YES
2:29:04 NO
I think it far more likely that a marathoner might do the 11 FAT than a sprinter running the 2:29.
Don't be ridiculous, there's not a single elite marathon runner who'd ever come close to 11.00 or 22.29.
Apart from Paul Ryan.
He's run 10.5 or something.
Hypoxic Delirium wrote:
One guy. An 800 runner who's never run an olympic qualifiying time in a 1500.Let alone an actual distance event.
One verified guy is all you need to prove it's possible. You know as well as I do that most guys simply haven't raced a FAT 100.
I will agree that this only proves it's possible for a world class 800 guy. We haven't proved 1500 or above.
fadlkfjadkj wrote:
Hypoxic Delirium wrote:One guy. An 800 runner who's never run an olympic qualifiying time in a 1500.Let alone an actual distance event.
One verified guy is all you need to prove it's possible. You know as well as I do that most guys simply haven't raced a FAT 100.
I will agree that this only proves it's possible for a world class 800 guy. We haven't proved 1500 or above.
Thread was about "the best elite distance runners" not "a small group of elite 800m runners".
Lewandoski proves nothing in the context of the thread. The whole point of which was to point out how deluded some distards are in regards to the true speed of their distance idols. All based on meaningless extrapolations from hand-timed, flying start urban legend training splits.
. In that respect it's been a 6 page runaway success.
correct-a-turtle corrects: wrote:
paper bag math for sub 11 in a standard 100m race.
Let's say the distance guy and the sprint guy both get to 30 meters in 4.00 seconds. (see chart in link below)
To record 11.00 distance guy needs to cover the remaining 70m in 7 seconds that is 1.0 sec per 10m about 10 flat pace for a flying 100..
On average the sprintguys go ~0.85 for those 10 m increments.
If you think the 0.85 to 1.0 ratio is possible you just have to figute out how to get your distance guy out of the blocks and to 30m with-in a couple of hundreds of Assafa
http://speedendurance.com/2008/08/22/usain-bolt-100m-10-meter-splits-and-speed-endurance/
30 m in 4 flat would be difficult if the distance guy tops out at 1 sec per 10m. He would have to be ahead of the elite sprinter after 10m (looking at the chart you linked). But 30m in 4 low is plausible ie something in the 11-mid range over 100m. However I have no idea if 1 sec per 10m is realistic top end for an elite distance runner.
No rolling starts or flying 100s. It they tried to run a 10 flat from a block or standing start, they'd rip their hammies to shreds. End of argument.
Marcin Lewandowski and Gareth Warburton, not to mention Rudisha and Coe, have been dealt with extensively on this thread:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4694207&page=0
, which also linked to this Rudisha thread:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4120166&page=0
**********************************
Also, I love the Mo Farah/Leonard Scott comparative anatomy post!
Such an intense debate over something so irrelevant
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA wrote:
No rolling starts or flying 100s. It they tried to run a 10 flat from a block or standing start, they'd rip their hammies to shreds. End of argument.
I estimated 11-mid from the blocks based on wineturtle's math. The 1 sec per 10m implies a 10 sec flying 100m if the runner can sustain top end speed for that long. This would be a rather talented distance runner. Maybe a mid-d guy could do it.
Rupp.
52 for the last 400.
50 for the open.
12.5 4 times in a row.
11.5 once. 11.75 would be the slowest, 11 would be the quickest.
To those of you saying that these distance runners would be doing sprints and not distance if they could break 11.
Do you believe that in their primes that Allen Iverson, Michael Vick, or Ichiro could have broke 11 in the 100m? None of them ever have, but most probably believe they would if they tried. Yet they too pursued different events than sprinting to make it as a pro in sports.
Now would the same rule apply to them? See if you have sub-10 ability, you can make a living at sprinting. If you just have sub-11 ability, while very good you cannot make a living at sprinting with tht. But you can complement that speed with some other abilities you might have (great ball control, good arm, bat speed, or endurance) to make it professionally in another sport where sprint speed is useful but not the only aspect.
So stop trying to convince people that world class distance runners are slow at sprinting. If they were they would not be making a living at the sport of running. Can they all break 11? Probably not, but most will be close. As far as the fools going so far to claim they wouldn't break 12, you need a reality check.
noce wrote:
correct-a-turtle corrects: wrote:paper bag math for sub 11 in a standard 100m race.
Let's say the distance guy and the sprint guy both get to 30 meters in 4.00 seconds. (see chart in link below)
To record 11.00 distance guy needs to cover the remaining 70m in 7 seconds that is 1.0 sec per 10m about 10 flat pace for a flying 100..
On average the sprintguys go ~0.85 for those 10 m increments.
If you think the 0.85 to 1.0 ratio is possible you just have to figute out how to get your distance guy out of the blocks and to 30m with-in a couple of hundreds of Assafa
http://speedendurance.com/2008/08/22/usain-bolt-100m-10-meter-splits-and-speed-endurance/30 m in 4 flat would be difficult if the distance guy tops out at 1 sec per 10m. He would have to be ahead of the elite sprinter after 10m (looking at the chart you linked). But 30m in 4 low is plausible ie something in the 11-mid range over 100m. However I have no idea if 1 sec per 10m is realistic top end for an elite distance runner.
Why does the guy aiming for 11. flat need to be quicker to the 10m mark than the sprinter running at 10flat pace?
I was a totally unremarkable DI cross country runner and I ran 12.12 FAT in a 100m in high school. I was one of the slowest sprinters on my distance/mid-distance team. Many of the mid-D guys had FAT 100m PRs at or close to 11-flat in high school. Long story short, you are an idiot. You have no facts, and clearly have never been around high level distance runners.
t94bell wrote:
Rupp.
52 for the last 400.
50 for the open.
12.5 4 times in a row.
11.5 once. 11.75 would be the slowest, 11 would be the quickest.
Random numbers.
Placed together.
No logical link between them.
Sigh... wrote:
I was a totally unremarkable DI cross country runner and I ran 12.12 FAT in a 100m in high school. I was one of the slowest sprinters on my distance/mid-distance team. Many of the mid-D guys had FAT 100m PRs at or close to 11-flat in high school. Long story short, you are an idiot. You have no facts, and clearly have never been around high level distance runners.
Ok so you were a hopeless sprinter and distance runner. But you knew some non-hopeless ones? Got it.
Care to share some actual numbers? So we can see that a)they were elite distance runners; and b) they did run 11.00.
Because that's kinda, you know, what this thread is all about....
2012xxx wrote:
To those of you saying that these distance runners would be doing sprints and not distance if they could break 11.
Do you believe that in their primes that Allen Iverson, Michael Vick, or Ichiro could have broke 11 in the 100m? None of them ever have, but most probably believe they would if they tried. Yet they too pursued different events than sprinting to make it as a pro in sports.
Now would the same rule apply to them? See if you have sub-10 ability, you can make a living at sprinting. If you just have sub-11 ability, while very good you cannot make a living at sprinting with tht. But you can complement that speed with some other abilities you might have (great ball control, good arm, bat speed, or endurance) to make it professionally in another sport where sprint speed is useful but not the only aspect.
So stop trying to convince people that world class distance runners are slow at sprinting. If they were they would not be making a living at the sport of running. Can they all break 11? Probably not, but most will be close. As far as the fools going so far to claim they wouldn't break 12, you need a reality check.
Ok so now basketballers and footballers are the logical equivalent of elite distance runners? Cool argument bro.
Needless to say your idea that most world class distance runners would be 'close' to 11.00 is equally misguided.
around 2:20 Galen runs 75m (not sure if standing or rolling start) and Salazar walks to the camera and said if he kept going at that pace he would be at 11 seconds. He didn't look too fatigued.
RussellNation wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fws3wgj7lesaround 2:20 Galen runs 75m (not sure if standing or rolling start) and Salazar walks to the camera and said if he kept going at that pace he would be at 11 seconds. He didn't look too fatigued.
A hand timed 75m from a flying start? Ok well that proves it then, thread over.
Actually, if he wasn't fatigued he should be able to go at least half a second faster right?
I think from this we can all be satisfied that the best elite distance runners can do 10.50 for 100m.
Well, if you asked elite distance runners to do sub-12 100M from blocks without prior preparation, it is very probable that none can do it. However, if you gave them a couple of months to train and financial incentives worth risking their distance career on injury, you would be suprised how many would break this.