400m training

Karma Police wrote:

Is anyone here interested in discussing 400m training at a decent level (aiming for 46.0)?

I'm curious if there is anyone here to discuss programs and building. I've put together a program with parts based on some of the stuff Clyde Hart does, but it's more ends to middle than long to short. I've wondered about Hart's program, but he did coach 2 of the fastest 4 in history, so he must know something. I think he's coached about 12 sub-45 runners.

I was never a 46.0 man, but I want to know your relevant personal bests (do not tell us your one mile or XC times).

many state, "Aiming." wrote:

Karma Police wrote:

Is anyone here interested in discussing 400m training at a decent level (aiming for 46.0)?

I'm curious if there is anyone here to discuss programs and building. I've put together a program with parts based on some of the stuff Clyde Hart does, but it's more ends to middle than long to short. I've wondered about Hart's program, but he did coach 2 of the fastest 4 in history, so he must know something. I think he's coached about 12 sub-45 runners.

I was never a 46.0 man, but I want to know your relevant personal bests (do not tell us your one mile or XC times).

This is about a 7-8 month build

Monday – The Hart 200s pyramid – 10x200 in 30 (all 2 min recovery) for 4 weeks, then 9x200 in 29, 8x200 in 28 etc, getting down to 5x200 in 25, then becoming 1.5km of volume at 52 speed (600m speed), or 3x400 in 52 with 8-10 min

Tuesday – gym, deads, cleans, hamstring work + other gym

Wednesday – 15 mins of diagonals @ 800 speed, building to 20 mins, and in 3-4 months building to 10x200 with 2 min recovery in 28 or 6x300 with 4 min recovery (ie 2km of volume @ 800 speed)

Thursday – 6x200 or 5x250 or 4x300 (alternating) at 50 speed for 6 weeks, 49 speed for 6 weeks, 48 speed for 6 weeks, then 1.1km of volume at 47 speed, then 1km of volume at 46 speed, adding at end 2-3 x 200 in 30 with 30” rest

Friday – lighter gym, skipping, boxing, some upper body, ab workout

Saturday – speed development, plyos, sleds/ropes, stick running, 60s at 6.80-6.90 for 6 weeks, then 80s at same speed for 6 weeks, 100s for 6 weeks, 120s for 6 weeks, then 150s (hence ends to middle),

Sunday – rest (roller and stretch)

An 400 gurus around?

Also never ran 46, but I find my 400 improves when I do much less volume than advocated above. 10x200 that's over a mile of distance. Are you really sprinting at that point? For two minutes of rest, how about 5 x 100? You aren't fully recovered from a 100m sprint in 2 minutes, its still working endurance.

but I'd do even 5x 50 meters to start, with full rest. As long as you're not going into severe oxygen debt each rep, the workout is suitable for base building. that's what I wanted to post here really, since this is a distance running forum and most here think of base training as volume. Well it can also be things like hurdle drills, block starts, flying sprints, sprint tempo.

My issue with Hart's programmes is that he was getting guys that were bringing a lot of raw speed to the table, then piling on the longer work.

If you're running low 10 then you can afford to lose a little bit of the top end and still go through 200 in mid 21. If you're a 10.6 guy, then neglecting that top end is going to have some serious issues with your speed reserve.

Critical mass system.

https://youtu.be/a_V84iC_iL4

Were you not on this message board yesterday? Hart is the worst thing that ever happened to sprinting.

I agree, and will say basically the same thing in a slightly different way.

Quincy Watts brought a lot of speed to the table, and his coaches turned him into a 43.5 guy in a much shorter period of time and with a lot less work than he would have had to do under Hart.

What Hart's program does do is make athletes able to run at exact pace, and it works if you stay with it. Sanya Richards Ross went out too fast in the 2008 Olympics, but after working with Hart ran better paced races, although she didn't really get much faster.

To go sub 46 you have to be fast enough to run under 22 seconds for the first 200 and strong enough to come back in 24 seconds for the second 200. The closer to 100% you have to go to hit that first goal, the harder it is to hit the second. ( I do think, however, that 10.6 is enough speed to go 21.8/24.0, if the athlete has the right body type and stride.)

I had a college teammate and friend who raced 46.xx (low). Since it was not my P.B., I will not tell you what you are doing is right or wrong except boxing. There is a neuromuscular factor in racing fast, especially 800m and shorter events. Your brain has to be healthy to produce adrenaline and heroin-like endorphins when necessary. In military, I did train elite boxers. I was not a boxer. They'd try to run with me. Don't mess around with boxing

GGGG wrote:

My issue with Hart's programmes is that he was getting guys that were bringing a lot of raw speed to the table, then piling on the longer work.

If you're running low 10 then you can afford to lose a little bit of the top end and still go through 200 in mid 21. If you're a 10.6 guy, then neglecting that top end is going to have some serious issues with your speed reserve.

That's always been my issue too, but you can't argue with his results. Hart said it's a lot easier to coach endurance into sprinters than to coach speed into 800 runners.

This program doesn't neglect top end speed though. The Saturday work plus the very specific gym on Tuesday means 2 days are spent specifically working on acceleration and top speed.

400Spartans wrote:

Also never ran 46, but I find my 400 improves when I do much less volume than advocated above. 10x200 that's over a mile of distance. Are you really sprinting at that point? For two minutes of rest, how about 5 x 100? You aren't fully recovered from a 100m sprint in 2 minutes, its still working endurance.

but I'd do even 5x 50 meters to start, with full rest. As long as you're not going into severe oxygen debt each rep, the workout is suitable for base building. that's what I wanted to post here really, since this is a distance running forum and most here think of base training as volume. Well it can also be things like hurdle drills, block starts, flying sprints, sprint tempo.

Doing 10 x 200 at 30 obviously no, you are not sprinting. But for a 46.0 guy, the 400 is about 30% aerobic, so you need to work that system.

Also I didn't go into detail but the program includes a lot of drills, speed drills, plyos etc.

I was thinking about some of these comments some more and there are a few other points I should make:

- whilst you need to be able to run fast (21.0-21.2 to run 46.0), you don't necessarily have to do it a lot in training. You have to be capable of it, and do the background work (plyos, gym, sleds/rope) to give you that speed. But the more often you do it in training, the more likely you are to get injured. Speed reserve is of course crucial to being able to bring it home

- if you have the strength/power and the technique and coaching, then the speed is there

- building this way strengthens the body (though I don't have scientific evidence for this), but also running at slower paces lessens the risk of injury, especially if someone has had a few hamstring injuries (as this athlete has)

- The LSU guys (Norman and Benjamin) apparently do a similar training structure. I've heard WVN talk about doing 500s. I'd wager WVN at his best would have run faster 200s if he wasn't doing the endurance work for his 400. His coach is old school.

The proof will be in the pudding and we won't know for 4-6 months.

I have absolutely no issue at all with that plan! but would tweak

I love how people answering either don't actually coach or don't coach sprints!

Id highly recommend buying this ebook and reading though entirely, looking specifically for the 6 week programme posted by KitKat, this is a very small part of a bigger plan but works on a concurrent basis, and is what has shaped a lot of modern 400m training!

Good long term conversation by KitKat, who is Mike Hurst a great Australian long sprint coach. His system is fleshed out in Francis ebook included above and in the Sprinter's Compendium as one of the main training systems for sprints. I also talked about it in detail in an interview with Opex Fitness

https://youtu.be/vnhWeWA3PdQ

Thanks but I know KitKat's training system well. Parts of it are good but it smashes them with 400m lactic work all year round (often twice a week) and IMO doesn't focus enough on speed development. Having said that there is some concurrent training in this schedule with training at 500m speed moving down to 400m speed all year round. Look at the Thursday sessions.

You understand that those distances don't mean the focus is lactate if they are run at high intensity with large recoveries? If I were you seriously give my critical mass system a listen. Justin Robinson was trained in a similar model along with many of the state champs or state runners up in the 400 and 4x400. The video was posted above. It explains that getting attached to the distances is the wrong way to go when considering what it does to the actual race performance. Highest correlation to improved sports performance comes from intervals just above or below the actual main race/event. This holds true on the track and in the throws. Good conversation.

I didn't have 40 mins to listen, but he (or is that you) didn't say anything inconsistent with what I have suggested. Unless you're saying 350s and 450s esp in season are important, with big recoveries in which case Hart does that too. There's a lot of what Hart says that I don't agree with, but how many sub-45 guys have you coached? What about sub-43.50? You can't simply denigrate what Hart says, or Pat Henry.

Id gently advise not to have that stance!

By your reckoning no one should ever train different to what WVN does because no one has ever ran that fast so how can any other coach know what to do!

For record this is why Kerley moved away and changed his coach (nothing to do with graduating etc) was because he didn't believe his coach could get him to sub 43 (absolute prat!) So he wanted to be with a coach who has coach someone who has ran fast.....

.... errrrrmmm Mr Kerley your coach who trained you for years got you to 43.7, the coach you moved to has never had a world record directly (stupid consultant roles do not count!)

For reference the Mike Hurst training mentioned about is concurrent in its purest form, hitting all elements correctly including speed, infact more so than Hart, Hart has the benefit of a large pool of already fast athlete so ....

What is your 200pb as this will dictate if you have a chance

It's not me, it's an athlete whose programming I'm involved with. And he ran 21.50 as a 17yo, but hasn't run one for 2 years partly due to unlucky injuries.

I certainly don't believe all athletes should train the same. One of the best pieces of advice I have heard is train the athlete, not the event. But this athlete has some endurance base - 2.01 800 as a 14yo off very low mileage. Aged 11 I think around 9.45 for 3km XC. I think he can handle more work and keep his speed.

His main coach puts speed development as the main focus and they have a sub-10.10 guy in the squad, so the coach has a good idea what he's doing. The Saturday session and the Tuesday gym are solely focused on speed and strength. It's not a copy of Hart's training by any means. But I've tried to use what I think are the best and most logical elements of it. 3 endurance sessions a week, but different types, and with a logical progression.

If you want to get to 2x200 PR + 3.5 seconds, you need to be bloody fit.