Most world class distance runners can run in the 22 second range for the 200, even though less than a quarter of their muscles are fast twitch.
However, most average guys, if trained to their full potential in the 200, would not be able to run 22 seconds or faster even though half of their muscles are fast twitch.
Why?
some guy... wrote:
Most world class distance runners can run in the 22 second range for the 200, even though less than a quarter of their muscles are fast twitch.
Not only that, but they don't even train for the 200 and can still run in the 22 second range. Most of them also live at altitude, which hinders sprint speed (do any good sprinters live at altitude or have altitude tents? I don't think so).
some guy... wrote:
Why?
Drugs?
Running efficiency. Fast twitch or slow twitch, a good runner moves efficiently, which translates to greater speed than someone who just has the right fibers to generate power.
The answer is...
B/c athletes can train their fiber types. For example, a sedentary person's "FT" fibers would have a smaller cross section, # of fibers per unit of measurement, be harder to recruit, worse trained CNS, slower speed of contraction, fatigue easier and you could go on and on.
Meanwhile a trained athletes ST fibers can be trained to have some qualities of FT.
Add in the fact that a trained athletes CNS is trained better meaning he can maximally recruit a higher percentage of all types of his fibers. In all likelyhood a sedentary person, even if they had way more FT fibers, wouldn't be able to properly use/recruit anywhere near as many as a trained athlete. An untrained athlete would also not have as smooth of a coordination of recruitment.
forgot to add, that the point is that it's more than just fiber types that determine sprint ability.
It's the CNS, and the amount of increase in the things listed above that occurs during training. ELites are high responders.
I doubt alot of the top 10k guys can run 22.
Most of them top out between 24 and 26. Just because they close a fast 10k in 25 (with a flying start) doesn't mean they can run 22.
I knew a 3 time NCAA champ who could only run 52 for 400 and about 25 for 200. He ran 13:25 for 5k. The guys who are running 13:00 aren't running 13:00 because their 400 time is better than his was...
bad connection wrote:
B/c athletes can train their fiber types. For example, a sedentary person's "FT" fibers would have a smaller cross section, # of fibers per unit of measurement, be harder to recruit, worse trained CNS, slower speed of contraction, fatigue easier and you could go on and on.
The question is:
However, most average guys, if trained to their full potential in the 200, would not be able to run 22 seconds or faster even though half of their muscles are fast twitch.
bump
Running Efficiency, but most of that is from elastic energy return from just running hard, not some jog in the park.
1. Not all FT/ ST fiber is alike. Enzyme qualities can vary across a continuum.
2. You underestimate the % FT in a true modern elite distance runner. Times have changed. Tiny sized "milers" now dominate the 5 and 10k. You wanna know if someone might be the WR holder in the 10k? Ask him if he thinks he can run 3:30 for 1500m. Wanna know if the American woman you are talking to has run a 4:00 1500m? Ask her if she's run <1:59 for 800m. In both case, questions about mileage or ST fiber will tell you nothing.
3. ST isnt the godsend they thought it was 25 years ago.
That myth is a dinosaur from the old oxygen delivery paradigm.
The fatigue resitance capability of FT was underestimated by early isolated muscle testing which ignored the possibility of motor unit rotation/substitution and motor unit synergy (the collective summed force capability of a given set of active muscles working together will exceed the summed capability of the those same muscles measured separately).
You need a balance of power and fatigue resitance to win.
ST might give you fatigue resistance, but you'll sacrifice on the power side.
some guy... wrote:
Most world class distance runners can run in the 22 second range for the 200, even though less than a quarter of their muscles are fast twitch.
However, most average guys, if trained to their full potential in the 200, would not be able to run 22 seconds or faster even though half of their muscles are fast twitch.
Why?
Some of the top 1500m men might run 22. Most of the elite long distance runners will be in the region of 23.5 to 24 seconds for 200m at the peak of their season.
Billy Mills has said that he ran 23.5 a few days before his win at Tokyo. I think he said the East German coach had timed him. After asking about his time the East German coach said, 23.5 and said it was slow, assuming he was a sprinter. He asked Billy what event he was running and Billy told him the 10,000 meters. The coach then said "oh very fast."
some guy... wrote:
Most world class distance runners can run in the 22 second range for the 200...
Most? Give us examples.
I'm laying big money that you can't get a single proper 5/10 man to run sub 23.
Hicham el Guerrouj is the world record holder for the mile and the 1500m, and the reigning Olympic champion for the 15 and 5, and could easily spank the likes of Bekele in a sprint finish and I'll bet even he couldn't go faster than about 23.5.