Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Ben L Wrong wrote:
Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Try mid to high 12's out of blocks at sea level
Bob Hays split 8.5 on a relay dude. Flying start makes a big difference
He'd run 12.0+ out of the blocks with FAT, give me a break.
not even close wrote:
Ben L Wrong wrote:Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Try mid to high 12's out of blocks at sea level
Bob Hays split 8.5 on a relay dude. Flying start makes a big difference
But 8.5 was hand timed.
And Nick Willis is not in peak form (like Hayes in Tokio 64'), according to himself.
Ben L Wrong wrote:
Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Willis would be better (and faster) using standing start (correct starting technique for distance runners) rather than using blocks.
Ben L Wrong wrote:
not even close wrote:Try mid to high 12's out of blocks at sea level
Bob Hays split 8.5 on a relay dude. Flying start makes a big difference
But 8.5 was hand timed.
And Nick Willis is not in peak form (like Hayes in Tokio 64'), according to himself.
This 11.11 was hand timed too you idiot.
12-mid to high. He's not going to be noticeably faster over 100m in summer "peak" form.
messi wrote:
Ben L Wrong wrote:Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Willis would be better (and faster) using standing start (correct starting technique for distance runners) rather than using blocks.
But he would be much, MUCH slower than using flying start, which is what he did here.
Ben L Wrong wrote:
[quote]not even close wrote:
[quote]Ben L Wrong wrote:
And Nick Willis is not in peak form (like Hayes in Tokio 64'), according to himself.
Unless you are a 100m runner, peak form does not mean your 100m speed will improve.
not even close wrote:
Willis would be better (and faster) using standing start (correct starting technique for distance runners) rather than using blocks.
But he would be much, MUCH slower than using flying start, which is what he did here.[/quote]
Somebody with a lower top end speed gets up to maximum speed a bit quicker than somebody with elite top end speed. So I think a block start would only add about a second to his flying 100m. So, I'd guess around 12.1
This flying 100m is hand timed though, so obviously not very precise, may or may not be accurate.
Mostly agreed except in 20 minutes I think he could be taught to be most effective from a three point out of Moye blocks. As to his time. 11.11 = 11.3 at best. Give a second for acceleration puts that effort to more like 12.3. Betting this wasn't a time trial so give him a half second for actually racing. I'd say around 11.8 FAT from a gun start.
messi wrote:
Ben L Wrong wrote:Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Willis would be better (and faster) using standing start (correct starting technique for distance runners) rather than using blocks.
runnerdnerd wrote:
Somebody with a lower top end speed gets up to maximum speed a bit quicker than somebody with elite top end speed. So I think a block start would only add about a second to his flying 100m. So, I'd guess around 12.1
That's not true. Someone with a low top end speed has crap acceleration, so they still take just as long to get there.
zero top speed = zero time to top speed
If this was done by a black competitor Nick Willis would probably accuse them of doping
dsrunner wrote:
zero top speed = zero time to top speed
That's a singularity. Someone with low top end speed takes just as long to get there (thus loses just as much time in standing vs. flying start) as high top end speed.
Depends a lot on the wind too. More useful would be a baseline from previous seasons for comparison, but a rolling start makes you much, much faster.
messi wrote:
Ben L Wrong wrote:Interesting. 11.2x ability? (from the blocks, in peak form, during the summer)
Nick Willis â€@nickwillis 2 min
Altitude benefits more than just your endurance. I just shocked myself with a rolling start 100m PB - 11.11s
Willis would be better (and faster) using standing start (correct starting technique for distance runners) rather than using blocks.
The IAAF needs to do something sensible for a change and ban starting blocks ASAP. Track races are supposed to be over flat surfaces and starting blocks are an artificial addition to this surface to gain propulsive force. This is just like having a downhill start or launching yourself from a spring. Starting blocks have made a mockery of sprinting.
not even close wrote:
runnerdnerd wrote:Somebody with a lower top end speed gets up to maximum speed a bit quicker than somebody with elite top end speed. So I think a block start would only add about a second to his flying 100m. So, I'd guess around 12.1
That's not true. Someone with a low top end speed has crap acceleration, so they still take just as long to get there.
No, in terms of distance to max speed, it is much quicker, more like 30m or 35m to maximum speed, whereas an elite 100m run is out near 50m before hitting top speed.
My guess is a top end sprinter will lose LESS with a rolling start than a blocks/stationary start than a distance runner will. If we add a second to a sprinter, I'd expect a stationary start would add more to a distance runner. They're simply not built to get moving quickly.
IMO, 11.1 ht for Willis, at altitude = he'd barely break 13 FAT at sea level. 12.5 at best.
of course it also depends a lot on exactly how "rolling" that start was.
runnerdnerd wrote:
not even close wrote:That's not true. Someone with a low top end speed has crap acceleration, so they still take just as long to get there.
No, in terms of distance to max speed, it is much quicker, more like 30m or 35m to maximum speed, whereas an elite 100m run is out near 50m before hitting top speed.
But they will take longer to run that 30-35m. Hence the time lost is about the same.
Willis says that he sacrifices some ability to run a fast time trial 1500m before championships in order to increase his sprinting speed for the kick of somewhat slower championship races. Ergo, I would assume he will be able to run faster at flying 100 just before the Olympics.
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these