Why not use blocks for 800m?

I also think they could be useful. At least a little in the 1:42 and under category. But I wouldn't bet on it...

Allan Wells (1980 Olympic 100m champion) starting well in a big meet no blocks (slow motion of start in finals at 4:45 in video):

http://speedendurance.com/2011/03/28/starting-blocks-are-overrated/

John Woodruff (and the rest of the field) starting down in the 1936 Olympic 800 (start is at 1:16 in the video):

http://youtu.be/rQ5BM0XN-_I

The rest of the Woodruff video is absolutely worth watching.

Khadevis Robinson would be pissed.

Imagine two guys per lane using blocks. Makes me laugh thinking of the chaos.

trollism wrote:

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

The US is missing a trick this year though.

Pretty funny.

This post was made in 2008 when the US 800 team was Symmonds, Wheating and Christian Smith.

Who wants to deal with all of the false starting you get with blocks? It puts too much emphasis on the start, which isn't that important in the 800 anyway.

Anyway, the fact that there are sometimes 800m races with more than 8 runners means you can't use blocks because they don't work if you have to share a lane.

Back to the original question:

Yes, I think they could help. Blocks allows your body to be in a "more efficient" position to start with your head in front of your hips, but your hips still at the height they will be at when running. This increases your efficiency (using less energy) and helps you use your quads more and hamstrings less - saving the hamstrings for later. It may help .1 or .2 seconds if you know how to use them.

I think you guys are over analyzing this. I doubt blocks will make any difference in your overall 800m time. I mean let's be real, the race is way too long and involves more than pure sprinting ability to be good. Like rudisha said in his grand prix interview, there is definitely a rhythm to running an 800, so starting a fraction of a second faster doesn't mean that a runner will now run the whole race at a quicker pace. Blocks are pointless in that regard. But I do think they might have some appeal for getting into a better position easier at the start of the race. Granted, the race would have to be in lanes, but if you struggle getting off the line quickly, blocks may help you get into your desired position and pace a tad easier than a standing start. Still, even this is a stretch, in the grand scheme of things blocks are pretty useless.

800m Coach 235 wrote:

Back to the original question:

Yes, I think they could help. Blocks allows your body to be in a "more efficient" position to start with your head in front of your hips, but your hips still at the height they will be at when running. This increases your efficiency (using less energy) and helps you use your quads more and hamstrings less - saving the hamstrings for later. It may help .1 or .2 seconds if you know how to use them.

I don't agree with this. When in blocks your arms are not in running motion, you have to pull them into running motion.

I personally feel correct starting technique for distance runners is probably more effective for 400, and definitely more effective for 400IH.

With correct starting technique for distance runners you are LITERALLY running off the line (both legs & ARMS).

the chancer wrote:

I was actually thinking of doing a one hand on the ground sprinter style start in my next 800.

Not allowed according to the existing rules.

Not if you use tandem blocks ;)

saint-malo wrote:

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.

So, let's get even more unrealistic: I would love to see a mid distance race with starting blocks, in lanes, on a straight!

I say scrap blocks all together except for 100m. The mad scramble for the inside in a non staggered 400m would be unreal, even better for 200m. The 400mh would now use steeple barriers.

* Proper use of blocks are a known advantage in sprint races, without debate from any leading coaches or sprinters I've ever heard of.

* World class 800 runners routinely go out at sprint paces (50/51 second opening laps, or better).

Therefore, if the rules hypothetically allowed it why in the world would you NOT want any possible known advantage? Even if it's just 0.1 or 0.2 seconds, that's plenty of advantage in a close finish! Plus, cutting the field to 8 runners to allow for blocks is yet another advantage to be gained, as the stragglers who barely qualified in spots 9-12 would be eliminated and thus lessen your chance to get caught in traffic during the race. I know that many other and more impactful variables factor into an 800 race, but I say take any advantage possible and control any variables that you can, such as choosing to use blocks (if it was allowed). It seems like common sense.

As a reformed sprinter (45-second 400 runner) who later moved up to the 800, I can tell you from many years of my own experience that blocks are an invaluable tool to get to speed quickly, and I openly wondered the same thing as this discussion is about during my career. The first 8-ish seconds of any race you're just burning off muscle stores of sugars, creatine and ATP anyway so it's kind of a "freebie" at the beginning and you might as well get out FAST during that time (just be sure to settle into pace before the magic 8 second window closes!)

If they'd change the rules to allow it, using blocks in the 800 would be an absolute no-brainer in my opinion.

Not a real issue wrote:

Who wants to deal with all of the false starting you get with blocks? It puts too much emphasis on the start, which isn't that important in the 800 anyway.

Anyway, the fact that there are sometimes 800m races with more than 8 runners means you can't use blocks because they don't work if you have to share a lane.

In return, blocks confirm fair starts and would catch a quick start an official might miss. They add legitimacy to race times.

Galen Rupp doesn't use blocks, therefore they are useless!

Fair start wrote:

Not a real issue wrote:

Who wants to deal with all of the false starting you get with blocks? It puts too much emphasis on the start, which isn't that important in the 800 anyway.

Anyway, the fact that there are sometimes 800m races with more than 8 runners means you can't use blocks because they don't work if you have to share a lane.

In return, blocks confirm fair starts and would catch a quick start an official might miss. They add legitimacy to race times.

The IAAF requires blocks through 400 meters precisely because Allen Wells was seen to be getting an advantage by not using the pressure-sensitive blocks. On a synthetic track, blocks give almost no physical advantage. On dirt tracks, blocks were invented to "protect the track" from sprinters digging starting holes for their feet.

The difference between standing and crouch starts lies almost completely with the position of the center of mass relative to the base (the feet). In a four-point stance, the COM is in front of the feet, but too low requiring the athlete to stand up too soon. In a standing start, it's behind the feet, requiring the athlete to thrust it forward before being able to accelerate. Several years ago the University of South Dakota (I believe it was) developed blocks with hand holds which allowed a starting position with the COM ahead of the feet, but at the optimum angle for acceleration. They were quickly banned. In an 800, the energy required in moving from a crouch to running position would offset any potential acceleration advantage.

I don't think blocks has as much to do with a fast finishing time as it does with positioning in tactical affairs.

Why blocks are outlawed in the longest sprint is beyond me

O o o oreilly wrote:

To be honest after I lost state in the 800 by less than a tenth of a second it went through my mind if I would have had a solid start and not stuttered when I started ( kicked my leg back for traction when the gun went off) if I would have knocked off at least a tenth. But this is still a dumb post because so many other things happen in a race without lanes that losing a tenth or two from a start is probably very minimal from the bigger things that affect a race like passing on the corner, not cutting in exactly perfect, not running right next to the line, or even drafting. Not everyone in the same 800 race is going to run the same "race"

The advantage of blocks doesn't really apply to a tactical race. It is more about helping Rudisha get through that first 100 in 11.7 rather than 11.9.

A frontrunner like Jock could certainly enjoy the benefits of the blocks.

The guys are going through 400 faster than many men and basically all women in the open 400! Of course blocks make sense!

Can someone just try it! Try both ways a week apart in track season...

Some high school runner out there...

Time trial or do it at one of those meets that nobodys knows what is going on anyway....