Do people here really think the best elite distance runners can sprint 11 flat for 100m?

Not irrelevant at all. You produce speed, you maintain speed. Both aspects are required for top level endurance running.

It is surprising to me that so many are wrapped up in the early 70's mentality that high % ST fiber rules the world of distance running. Please read physiology published sometime within the past 15 years.

Is there a distance runner on the planet who really gives a damn about 100m times from blocks? running start, two steps at least, 10m at most

is extremely useful. Without something close to 11 flat capability over 100m, you aren't getting very far at any event 400-5000m.

Going from 12 flat to 11 flat is like going from 4:30 to 4:07 in the mile.

I think that's a good point. Chapionship class distance runners are fast period!! They are not championship class sprinters, but that does not mean they don 't necessarliy have 11 100 m leg speed. 11 sec is not world class, but it is very fast. Only about 1% of HS sprinters can go sub 11.

dsrunner wrote:

Not irrelevant at all. You produce speed, you maintain speed. Both aspects are required for top level endurance running.

It is surprising to me that so many are wrapped up in the early 70's mentality that high % ST fiber rules the world of distance running. Please read physiology published sometime within the past 15 years.

Is there a distance runner on the planet who really gives a damn about 100m times from blocks? running start, two steps at least, 10m at most

is extremely useful. Without something close to 11 flat capability over 100m, you aren't getting very far at any event 400-5000m.

If you're going to talk 100m times then they're meaningless if they're not FAT out of blocks. Otherwise differences in hand timing, how much of a rolling start you had, etc. make any comparisons impossible.

Do you go round saying that Asafa Powell runs 100m in 8.7s No? Why not? It's what he ran on the last leg of the 4x1 in Berlin.

Why would you switch to doing that when discussing the 100m capability of a distance runner.

Btw i like how you've apparently included 400m as distance event. WTF?

Curtis Beach, a young decathlete runs the 100m is 10.78 wind legal FAT. He is often thought of as a distance runner, He started out in distance, and was a solid XC runner in high school and has a decathlon PB of 3:59 in the 1500m, he probably would be 3:45ish if he ran that in an open 1500m race.

hey coach, there is (or was, dont feel like finding it and not sure if its still around) a video of galen rupp doing a workout with salazar on youtube doing 80m sprints at 11.0 100m pace. i dont understand why this is unbelievable though, 11.0 is not unheard of. also, a better comparison would be to compare usain bolt to a high school 1500m runner, which he probably would do just fine.

terdgdsfgdsf wrote:

I'm a 32:30 10k guy and I ran 12.8 out of blocks. I don't think bekele could run 11.00 but he'd definitely be under 12.

BEKELE CLOSED HIS 10K WR IN 10 POINT. IT'S ON YOUTUBE. SURE IT WAS A RUNNING START BUT THAT WAS AFTER 24 3/4 LAPS AT 10K WR PACE

[quote]Hypoxic Dilerium,

If you're going to talk 100m times then they're meaningless if they're not FAT out of blocks.

=============

That's not true. It's useful information. If someone is clocked at 8.7 on a relay leg you're not going to think they can't run a sub 10 FAT! And if someone split a 10.7 it's reasonable to expect them to do a 11 FAT. Hand timed sprint times are adjusted by adding .24 sec. You would need to add more for relay legs, but a relay leg is a good indication of FAT ability. But I do believe that one must prove any claim.

RussellNation wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fws3wgj7les

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.

LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! Stop it, it hurts so badly!

reply makes little or no cents wrote:

noce wrote:

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 did not say anything about a sprinter running at 10 flat, but regardless, click on the link and look at the splits. An elite sprinter covers 10-20m in 1 sec, and 20-30m in 0.9 sec. If the distance guy cannot cover 10m in less than 1 sec, then the only way for him to be even with the sprinter at 30 m is for him to cover the first 10m faster. The best start in the world, basically.

There is something up with Beaches 100m, its too fast for his ability. If he can really do 10.78 he should be able to run 45 flat in an open 400, or 1:45 flat for 800, which would make him more elite at both of those events than Decathlon.

Sometimes 100m PR's are fishy, not in a drug sense, just in the sense that there can be uncalled false starts, timing is off, or wind is above the allowable but the wind gauge doesn't report it.

10.78 for Beach is a little too fast. Unless he drops a 45.1 or a 1:45.4 I would question his 100m PR.

10.78 - 20.85/21.4 - 45.0/45.5

Beach should be an elite 400/400hurdles candidate not a decathlete if his 100m is really 10.78.

Even despite this, Beach trained for this, has significant muscle mass for it, and only manages 10.78. That should be an indication just how hard 11.0 FAT from the blocks would be for the vast majority of distance runners, not that a few of the very best would beat it.

heres the deal yo wrote:

hey coach, there is (or was, dont feel like finding it and not sure if its still around) a video of galen rupp doing a workout with salazar on youtube doing 80m sprints at 11.0 100m pace. i dont understand why this is unbelievable though, 11.0 is not unheard of. also, a better comparison would be to compare usain bolt to a high school 1500m runner, which he probably would do just fine.

Rupp is running sub 12 second pace yes, but not low 11. Remember Salazar is standing with stopwatch in hand at the finish, not an accurate way of measuring real sprint times.

lastminuteinsult wrote:

terdgdsfgdsf wrote:

I'm a 32:30 10k guy and I ran 12.8 out of blocks. I don't think bekele could run 11.00 but he'd definitely be under 12.

BEKELE CLOSED HIS 10K WR IN 10 POINT. IT'S ON YOUTUBE. SURE IT WAS A RUNNING START BUT THAT WAS AFTER 24 3/4 LAPS AT 10K WR PACE

Was that the 100m line or was that the 80-90m line? Yes, some tracks do have those.

Turds--

You have made a single point worthy of repeating: not all 100m PR's are created equal. 100m times are all over the map--some are unreasonably great, and sometimes they unreasonably suck. I have had experiences both ways, as has every other 100m sprinter.

That is why you have to look at a history of performances. Yes, an athlete can, for a single meet, run out of their mind--but in the case of an amazing time, you look to what the field did, the conditions, the venue, the time of year, the competition history that season, etc. to judge if the time is valid.

For instance, I don't know anything about Beach's 10.78

However, you REPEAT the mistake of assuming some sort of linear correspondence between dissimilar races, the 100 and the 400.

I was much faster than Beach over the 100m, but I never ran 45-flat in a 400.

I will say it one more time: absolutely NO elite distance runner could touch 11.00 FAT from the blocks at the same time as they were elite in distance--in fact, only a tiny number of them, and I mean tiny, as in only a couple, could break 12.00 FAT from the blocks, and that only after a period of specific block training. I do not include 800m runners in the distance category.

Galen Rupp in particular could NEVER break 12.00 from the blocks, no matter how much he trained for it. Right now, he would finish somewhere between 12.50 and 13.00 FAT from the blocks.

I encourage any and all distance runners to get in a FAT block-start 100m, and to post your times here.

I have drifted from 10.5 to 11.5 in my "career", such as it has been, and I know what it takes to occupy every point in that range. I know what kinds of athletes do what times. I have run alongside middle-distance and distance runners in 200m repeats, and I understand what kind of "speed" they are capable of. I know the various step-functions within that range, and who does what. Although there are various types of 800m runners, distance runners have nowhere near the 100m speed that the quickest 800m runners have in a standing-start 100m, no matter how "elite" the distance runner is at distance.

None of this is to disparage distance runners. Some of them exhibit remarkable ability, like Jeilan did in the 2011 10,000m at WC's, and like Bekele has done. But before you make suggestions like they could touch 11.00 FAT from the blocks, look first at who actually CAN do 11.00 FAT from the blocks, and compare them. Then go out and try it yourself. Record a time, and then do what you think is some sprint training, and then record another time, to get some appreciation of what is required to drop a FAT 100m time from the blocks.

DO NOT INCLUDE QUICK 800M GUYS IN THIS DISCUSSION. IMHO, quick 800m guys are essentially sprinters who aren't fast enough over any shorter distance. I differentiate them from "diesel" 800m runners like Rudisha.

Quick 800m runners have enough of a power-to-weight ratio to enable them to effectively use a block start, and to simulate a sort of drive phase in the 100m, without any real additional training, whereas diesel 800m guys do not.

And to answer the OP's question directly,

Yes, they absolutely believe it. Not only do they believe that they can do it using a hand-timed running start, they believe that they can do it from a FAT block start.

They really, actually, believe both of these things.

11.0 is state qualifying HS time for the 100 for most states. It was our small school HS record until we had the state champion who ran 10.78 FAT. Early he was handtimed in a meet in 10.5 and also long jumped 22-11 the first meet he even tried the event. He was smallish, 5-9 around 150 and ripped. His start sucked since he had a upright form straight from the blocks but he was fast twitch muscle all the way.

No way a 10k runner could ever run 11.0 FAT out of the blocks. Now a handtimed running start with an illegal wind in spikes-I could see it perhaps. I was hand timed in 12.4 once this way and I never broke 26.0 for a 200 in my life. I was probably low 14.0 for 100 out of the blocks.

Thank-you for the honesty.

Just the same as I can't run what people consider a respectable 5k.

I think I understand what is going on here. You will never come across a sprinter who would claim that any elite sprinter could run, say, a 15:00 5k, which would be analogous to the 11.00 FAT claim made by distance guys.

Why not? Because sprinters have actually tried running longer distances, because it is easy to try, and easy to time. Sprinters all know that they are nowhere near 15:00 for a 5k, based on actual knowledge.

It's not so easy to find a FAT 100m race with a block start, and a reliable and accurate wind gauge and officiating, though. A 5k anybody can try, and self-timed, it will be fairly accurate. A 100m, no way.

But I know that you guys actually go to meets where there are FAT block-start 100m races, even though you do the 5,000 or 10,000 or SC. Find some community meet, or maybe crash some master's meet, and try it. It's not really that inconvenient, it will take only a couple of seconds. You won't injure yourself because you won't be able to go hard enough to do so, so don't worry about it too much.

Or, try a 60m indoors at some hack meet. 60m times can correlate pretty well with 100m times, there is FAT timing, a block start, and you don't have to worry about wind.

Only when you have actually tried it will the discussion become interesting.

+1,000,000,000

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Thank-you for the honesty.

Just the same as I can't run what people consider a respectable 5k.

I think I understand what is going on here. You will never come across a sprinter who would claim that any elite sprinter could run, say, a 15:00 5k, which would be analogous to the 11.00 FAT claim made by distance guys.

Why not? Because sprinters have actually tried running longer distances, because it is easy to try, and easy to time. Sprinters all know that they are nowhere near 15:00 for a 5k, based on actual knowledge.

It's not so easy to find a FAT 100m race with a block start, and a reliable and accurate wind gauge and officiating, though. A 5k anybody can try, and self-timed, it will be fairly accurate. A 100m, no way.

But I know that you guys actually go to meets where there are FAT block-start 100m races, even though you do the 5,000 or 10,000 or SC. Find some community meet, or maybe crash some master's meet, and try it. It's not really that inconvenient, it will take only a couple of seconds. You won't injure yourself because you won't be able to go hard enough to do so, so don't worry about it too much.

Or, try a 60m indoors at some hack meet. 60m times can correlate pretty well with 100m times, there is FAT timing, a block start, and you don't have to worry about wind.

Only when you have actually tried it will the discussion become interesting.[/quote]

=========================================================

You are correct to point out that 11.0 is quite fast. Only about 1% of HS sprinters reach a 11 FAT. Even 12.0 is beyond most HS sprinters (about top 14%).

The 11 FAT is about equal to a 4:26 mile performance or a 15:05 5K. To achieve any of these times will require a particular body composition. And the high level sprint body type is not compatible with the high level distance type. It's not so much about size but more about muscle composition. The average world championship class sprinter is 5"11.5" and 167 lbs (5'7"/125 for distance). You might find a distance guy who could go 4:26 at that size but nearly all would weigh less.

Ashton Eaton has 10.21 speed and can go 4:36 in the mile at 185 lbs, not bad for a sprinter. However, he is far from world class distance ability.

When this thread started, I did tend to think that we could find a world class distance guy who had 11 FAT speed. But now, I doubt it too. I never thought there would many who had it but maybe a few. Still, I can't rule it out because distance runners don't normally try the 100 seriously. And even though 11 requires serious talent, it's possible that there might be the odd case of a WC distance guy having that ability.