Why not use blocks for 800m?

Blocks are required for 100-400 events in OPEN meets/events. They are not required for masters.

But using blocks requires both skill (read: practice) and strength. Most distance people will run slower, rather than faster, with blocks. People who hammer the first 100 before the lactate/H+ effects come into play (sometimes referred to stealing a fast 60) may get an advantage of up to a second, and the presence of blocks would disproportionate favor the sprinters with 400 speed/skill.

Ben- agree with your point but think the below example is flawed...

Assume that once you're at 800m speed you run at speed for the rest of the race. Clearly there is a benefit in having hit 800m speed earlier in the race?

Is the effort level with two equal runners both runnning the first 200 in 30 seconds with the first runner using blocks hitting race pace say 50m in whilst the other runner hits race pace say 60m in and having to then accelerate a little bit more to catch him at that 200 point?

I think the answer is probably more involved in which energy systems are used etc and whether the dynamics of a block start are more wearing?

I think the whole argument is pretty arbitrary to be honest. There may be a difference but should there be any sort of difference then the athlete could well end up in the front of the race and the wind cover the others would get would more than make up for it.

They still would be Slighly useful. Gain maybe .1 on the field and get the position in the pack you want more often.

I was gonna answer until I saw you said blocks and not blacks.

The US is missing a trick this year though.

Exactly. If someone can get up to 800 speed nearly instantly, they've used less energy and covered more distance than someone who has to labor longer to get to that cruising velocity, even if it's not flat-out.

Someone like Wariner, using blocks in the 800, could easily get a step or three on Kaki or Bungei. They might need it in the end, but this could really be the way to sub-100s.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the use of starting blocks in 880-yard college dual-meet races in the '50's and '60's. It was done, although I have no idea of whether they were effective. Surely there must be a few Old-Timers (really old) Out There who might contribute? Ernie Cunliffe (Stanford) comes to mind, and there were certainly others.

I think most people here are overlooking the opportunity cost of learning to use blocks. As one poster pointed out, it takes practice to learn to use blocks efficiently. If you use them improperly, they'd actually be a liability rather than an asset. An 800 meter runner might gain a *very* small advantage from proper use of blocks, but he or she could better spend that time and energy doing the training that will help them a lot more in the 800. Bottom line: with limited time and energy to train, there are lot more important things do so than master the use of blocks just to save a tenth of a second or so.

I can't believe nobody has mentioned that more often than not, an 800m race starts in alleys, not lanes. Hard to use blocks then.

Out of interest, how much of an advantage do they give in a 200m? About 0.2 of a second if used properly?

I don't agree that getting up to 800 speed nearly instantly with blocks uses less energy.There may be a greater benefit, i.e. higher initial speed, but it comes with a greater cost.In my opinion, using blocks won't shave any time off the 800m world record.

smarter than you wrote:

Exactly. If someone can get up to 800 speed nearly instantly, they've used less energy and covered more distance than someone who has to labor longer to get to that cruising velocity, even if it's not flat-out.

Someone like Wariner, using blocks in the 800, could easily get a step or three on Kaki or Bungei. They might need it in the end, but this could really be the way to sub-100s.

Kipketer was strong enough to benefit from blocks, and could easily have done 1:40.x if he had used them in a WR attempt. This is obvious.

kunikos wrote:

Maybe in the days of cinder that seemed like a good idea. But if you think about why blocks are banned for 400 and over... you have less than a minute to remove them- too much room for chaos.

Whatever, it only takes 5 seconds to remove blocks. If you can't get the blocks off the track in the amount of time it takes an 800 runner to go once around, you are most likely handicapped, really badly handicapped as even a guy with no legs could get blocks off the track in that amount a time. I image a guy with one arm as his only limb could still get the blocks off the track in time.

EXACTLY. There should be no problem at all to incorporate this into any meet.

This thinking is why NCAA rules are going to allow it starting in 2010. There will probably be slow uptake from people like Malmo who think that all there is to know about running was figured out before 1990, but progress will come soon enough from those with the creativity to excel.

Rick Wohluter used starting blocks on occasion; I saw it with my own eyes.

OK, I decided to settle this once and for all with a scientific experiment.

I went over to my high school track and did 2x800, as fast as possible, with exactly 10 minutes rest between them. This was after 2 miles of jogging, stretching and 4x100m accelerations.

The first time I did this in 2:08 (no blocks)

The second time I did it in 2:07 (blocks)

Obviously, these were hand-timed (by my friend). Keep in mind that I am a 3000-5000 guy, and I've basically been doing just base all summer. My best is a bit faster than this, but these were solid efforts.

I think that the scientific method proves pretty clearly that blocks could make a very serious difference in an 800 championship or WR attempt. If there had been someone racing me, that could be the difference between winning or losing, and if I was trained and tapered this could be the deciding factor in breaking a PR.

CASE CLOSED.

smarter than you wrote:

I think that the scientific method proves pretty clearly that blocks could make a very serious difference in an 800 championship or WR attempt.

CASE CLOSED.

I have to admit I've lost track of whether you're being sarcastic, stupid or a troll.

where on earth did you hear that ncaa rules are going to allow it starting in 2010? source please.

yes but why? quoting rules is like quoting the bible. the question still is 'why'?

Here's your source, pal:

http://www.xbox3sixty.co.uk/e107_images/newspost_images/pwned.jpg

THREAD OF THE YEAR!!!