Dead last coming off the curve and just blows past everyone to win easily in 20.40. How much time did that crappy curve cost him?
Do athletes hold back at all in a 200 or is it balls to the wall from the start like a 100?
Based on the fact that some negative split it and others don't I'd say they have varying strategies. Also, even a 100 is a balance of technique and raw power output. The title of "world's fastest man" gives it this mystique but it's still a race. The goal is to get to the finish line first, not peak at some completely unsustainable speed at 50 meters.
It's not quite as balls to the wall as a 100m, but still.
And I've never seen any reputable 200m sprinter NOT negative split the two 100m sections in a decent race. Think about it, the first 20m will be the slowest by far of any well-run sprint race. The first 20m of the 2nd 100m section, the runners are flying. So, that 2nd 100m surely must be faster than the first. Even tying up at the end, I can't imagine it making the 2nd 100m slower than the 1st.
It's just that Merritt's negative split here was a big one. Of course, Spearmon has been doing this for years, with some great success.
You're correct of course. I was thinking Bolt ran positive splits in his record, but that's an exaggeration. He simply ran faster than Johnson the first 100, and slower the second.
Here's the article I read last year, and should have remembered better. Out of the four fastest 200 meter times, Blake actually had the fastest last 100.
http://speedendurance.com/2012/01/16/yohan-blake-200-meter-splits-why-blake-will-beat-bolt/
Dead last coming off the curve? That's not how I see it.
As you know, you can burn up a heck of a lot of energy in the first 10 strides, which is where Merritt took it easy, relative to the field.
That sort of strategy is OK if you know 2 things: 1) your top speed is fairly high, and 2) your SE is good.
The competition wasn't great. Merritt has (2), but not (1) above. In a decent 200m race such a strategy would have failed him massively.
I think he was taking it easy here against a field he knew he could beat.
How much did it cost him? Nothing, he won the race in grand fashion.
Timewise, I think he's in as good 200m shape as he's ever been in. He could compete credibly in any 200m race--in fact, seeing his closing form in this race (which seems to me to be almost EXACTLY like Johnson's form in the Seoul 100m), I would even say that he is at least as good a 200m runner as he is a 400m runner--and possibly better, if he can run a good first 40m.
He was still crisp coming through that finish. Unlike Wariner, maybe Merritt should move down in distance. 20.40 is no terrific time, but he's shown that he's capable of better.