Bolt,MJ,TGay,YBlake,WvanN,XCarter
Bolt,MJ,TGay,YBlake,WvanN,XCarter
sub-elite couch wrote:
10 / 20 / 44 is not very good for a 400 guy.
He shows good speed endurance from 100 to 200, running the two at the same speed, but then slows down badly at the 400.
Total and complete BS. The general rule of thumb of equivalent performances is that your 200m time should be roughly double your 100m time, and your 400m time should be roughly double 1.1 times your 200m time. So 20 x 1.1 = 22, and 22 x 2 = 44.
Transition from 200m to 400m is where we see much more variability. However, it's pretty standard to run approx. double your 100m time for the 200m, and therefore does NOT show especially good speed endurance from 100m to 200m. He has STANDARD speed endurance from 100m to 200m.
The fact that he can be FASTER than double 1.1 times his 200m is where his ability lies and where he deserves praise. After all, his PR's are 9.98 (or about 10), 19.94 (or about 20), and 43.48 (significantly less than 44). Although some other 400m greats (e.g. Jeremy Wariner or Quincy Watts) had a deeper time cut from 200m to 400m, Wayde's times are pretty well in line with LaShawn Merritt (19.98 / 43.65). Wayde and LaShawn are just more balanced athletes than Jeremy and Quincy, even though all are 400m guys.
Interestingly, if you apply this rule to Michael Johnson, you could say that he has the worst slowdown: 19.32 x 1.1 x 2 = 42.504, which is significantly less than his actual 400m PR of 43.18. However, being that he was concurrently the WR holder in the 200m AND 400m, that he spent more time consistently under 44 than anyone else, and that his 400m PR (and still current WR) came late in his career, it could easily be argued that he just never had the competition to push him to his best. You could also argue that he had already run sub-43 in relays, but that's another story.
Back to van Niekerk, it's not so surprising that he's still a "400 guy" when you consider how rare sub-44 is. 57 guys have ever legally run under 20.00 in the 200m, but only 14 have ever gone sub-44.
94 sub 10 men.
Bob Schul Country wrote:
doped to the gills
We'll find out. New tests apparently detect any drug thats entered your body pretty much.
Star wrote:
I thought Xavier Carter would be the first sub 10,20,44 man.
He won NCs in the 100 and 400 on the same day and then ran the 200 in 19.63 that year.
His best 100 wound up being 10.00 and never bettered 44.5 in the 400.
Actually I agree, but in reality Johnson was there too and 10 years earlier.
So Johnson and Carter both had the ability, but only Niekerk has pulled it off.
I think Johnson regrets not running the 100m more, lol.
Early in the Bolt story Coach Mills was sure Bolt was a future 400meter WR holder.
TrackCoach wrote:
elmore345 wrote:What an achievement...He ran 9.98 today for 100m
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/35794869Michael Johnson, Bolt and the XMan could have done this, but they didn't get the right opportunity.
I love when someone attempts to belittle an achievement by suggesting others could have accomplished said achievement. It's an all time classic loser tactic.
Star wrote:
This big news.
Michael Johnson focused on the 100 for one year but he just couldn't get under 10.
From memory, Michael Johnson ran some 10.1s early in his career, but he was only around 20 flat in the 200m at that time. Obviously he was faster than 10.1 when he set the world record in the 200m. Once he started to became dominant in the 200/400, I don't recall him running another serious 100m.
Xman certainly could have if his career wasn't cut short and Bolt was running 45x in his teens, people thought he would actually become a 400m sprinter. With all of that said, what Niekerk did is special and I expect him to drop a monster 200m this year. A 400m sprinter with sub-10 speed is MJ type talent.
sub-elite couch wrote:
10 / 20 / 44 is not very good for a 400 guy.
He shows good speed endurance from 100 to 200, running the two at the same speed, but then slows down badly at the 400.
"not very good" what?! he's the only one to ever go sub in all three. you are nuts
TrackCoach wrote:
Star wrote:This big news.
Michael Johnson focused on the 100 for one year but he just couldn't get under 10.
From memory, Michael Johnson ran some 10.1s early in his career, but he was only around 20 flat in the 200m at that time. Obviously he was faster than 10.1 when he set the world record in the 200m. Once he started to became dominant in the 200/400, I don't recall him running another serious 100m.
Xman certainly could have if his career wasn't cut short and Bolt was running 45x in his teens, people thought he would actually become a 400m sprinter. With all of that said, what Niekerk did is special and I expect him to drop a monster 200m this year. A 400m sprinter with sub-10 speed is MJ type talent.
Johnson ran the 10.1's later in his career, when he was so juiced as to be comical looking next to other runners.
Van Niekerk is a legit threat to take down MJ's record. I hope he succeeds.
a man who loves track wrote:
sub-elite couch wrote:10 / 20 / 44 is not very good for a 400 guy.
He shows good speed endurance from 100 to 200, running the two at the same speed, but then slows down badly at the 400.
"not very good" what?! he's the only one to ever go sub in all three. you are nuts
Sub-elite couch is a troll, and a good one. He has been winding up posters all over the boards lately.
Meh he only broke 10 at altitude. Real men break 10 near sea level