What 2.0x range of distances covers the widest physiological ground?

I think that this thread may actually last longer than your deceased Alan Webb topic from earlier today!

Gee, how come it became deceased, Mr 42.98 obsessed stalker guy? You creep me out, Man. Seriously. Get a life.

I would guess 400/800, based on the fact that much more aerobic energy/metabolism or whatever scientific term you want to use, is necessary for an elite level performance.

I would think it is a much bigger jump going up from 400 to 800 than from 5k to 10k. A good 5k'er will have enough endurance to still do ok, same with 15/3.

Not real sure on 3/6. I don't follow sprints closely but would hazard a guess that most elites who specialise in the 100 or 200 can still run mighty quick over their non-preferred.

I vote 4/8.

How many guys are competitive at both events at an elite level. None that I can think of, aside from 800 guys dropping down for the 4x4 in school. Not the case in any other of the doubles. You see 1/2, 8/15, 15/3k, etc. guys a lot.

Easily the 4/8. The 100/200 is a close one. A really fast powerful 100m guy might not have the tank to last 200m. The 100m is purely dependant on the ATP-CP energy system. In the 200m fast glycolysis starts to come into play.

Alan

not one of the ones you listed, but what about the marathon and the half marathon?

Half and Marathon are pretty close physiologically.

How about Marathon and 50 mile race?

Alan

The 400 m vs the 800 m.

I'm wondering if any good runner who specialzes in one dist. can do double the distance...tho' I once found in HS dropping down to the 880 yd. from the 1 mile was extremely difficult. The change of pace was pretty fast.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Half and Marathon are pretty close physiologically.

How about Marathon and 50 mile race?

Alan

No because we all know that the top marathoners can dominate in the 50.