slow as dirt in sprints

slowaf wrote:

So I have terrible speed. my distance prs are not too bad, 5k xc is 15:48 3200 is 9:39 and 1600 is 4:35. I ran a 57 400 in a relay split. I really need to increase my speed so I can get my goal of a 9:10-15 3200. I know dropping that much time is quite a bit but from my sophmore to my junior year i went from 10:19 to 9:39. So I think i can do it with enough miles, i just need the speed. so if anyone could give me some ideas on what to do that would be great

Your speed isn't that bad. There are 31 flat 10k guys who only run around 60 flat. Sure, you aren't setting the world on fire with 57s 400m speed, but as you said you got a high percentage of slow-twitch muscle fibers which is great for longer distances.

Basic speed can't be improved much, so you would be better off training for 10k-marathon, which your body is clearly built for. Endurance can be improved significantly even at your level.

Salazar was similar to you, he had no great basic speed but achieved outstanding times in the 10k-marathon, it's all about muscle fiber setup/distribution.

I can't believe people like this guy still exist.

Yes, basic speed can be increased. Through the winter do 4-6x 8 second hill sprints once or twice per week (preferably after a tempo). Transition to flat 60s or 80s on the track a month out from the track season. Start lifting weights. Single leg exercises are the most potent. 3x5 reps with 2-3 minutes in between sets. Do core.

If you've done no strength or sprint training in the past, you will be shocked at how much faster you are in the 400m, how much better you feel at every pace, and how much this translates to races 800m-10k.

Not a College Runner wrote:

I can't believe people like this guy still exist.

Yes, basic speed can be increased. Through the winter do 4-6x 8 second hill sprints once or twice per week (preferably after a tempo). Transition to flat 60s or 80s on the track a month out from the track season. Start lifting weights. Single leg exercises are the most potent. 3x5 reps with 2-3 minutes in between sets. Do core.

If you've done no strength or sprint training in the past, you will be shocked at how much faster you are in the 400m, how much better you feel at every pace, and how much this translates to races 800m-10k.

Your advice is very good - I think many distance runners should be doing all of the things you recommended (some hill sprints, quicker running on the flat, weights, core, etc.). Do I believe it will magically change his muscle fiber ratio in favor of more FT muscles? Definitely not!

You need to realize how fast people with a decent number of fast-twitch fibers are without any training. There are too many distance runners out there who are comparatively worse in short races AND are tired of losing every kick/finish and change their training to improve their 100 dash or 400 dash time instead of sticking to what worked for them (mileage, long intervals-CV, tempo runs, long runs, etc). What happens? Their endurance falls off dramatically, they are slower and find out they didn't - or only very slightly - increase their 400 dash at all.

To quote Tinman: "Mostly, speed is created by genetic endowment. You can fine-tune what you have and improve speed by about 10%. Compare that to strength and endurance: 300% and 2000%."

I don't think it could be summed up any better. If someone has a lot of FT fibers, everyone will immediately know it, training or not. If someone doesn't, and is very heavy on the endurance side of things, no type/amount of training can really make drastic changes, only very small fine-tuning which OP might have already received due to training in a HS program and running events like 400 relays.

I would much rather have him stick to his strengths, and become a GREAT distance runner than investing a lot of resources and training time into trying to improve a decent, but not great 400m speed into a slightly better one.

As stated above, 57 really isn't that terrible for a distance runner. I'm not sure what age you are, but I was 64, 59, 57, 52 throughout high school in the 400, and ran 4:59, 4:37, 4:18, 4:13 for 1600 those years respectively, so your 57/4:37 aligns decent with my progression.

My last couple years where I started running more serious times I was lifting weights 4 days per week, high weight about 6-8 reps per set. I was doing plyometrics once per week which is jumping and very short sprints only a couple seconds. As long as you are still running a lot while lifting weights you do not have to worry about getting bulky and heavier (I was between 55-70 miles per week), instead you will just make whatever muscle mass you do have as strong as it can be.

I also did 5 minutes of core exercises every day, and an additional 25 pushups right before bed. All the little things add up.

Actually Phil is correct. Basic speed is genetic. Speed endurance however is very trainable.

Everything is genetic if you look at this that way. Endurance is also genetic trait that can be trained, same as speed.

Both can be trained to large extent however. Speed is very much coordination, ability to recruit required motor units in very short period of time. Obviously, your muscle fiber make up will determine in which distances you will be most successful and will limit you on either of endurance/speed side, but both can be very much trained.

More likely than not, a young adult in high school will be far away from his potential on either way of spectrum. Just because one is shaving seconds or tens of seconds in sprints compared to minutes in long distances does not make improvements viewed as percentage all that different.

The previous poster was right on point with short hills, lifting, core, etc. Not to be forgotten that you are most likely still growing into your body and filling up your muscle mass. Work dedicate either part of workout or single day before a tempo, threshold, long repeats type of work for easy running + sprints, coordination work and you will significantly improve.

No, your maximum speed is not going to improve, that's completely unrealistic. Do your homework before you post training advice.

Speed is highly trainable.

A lot of distance runners don't believe this to be the case because they don't do speed work. What they should really be saying is speed will not improve much off low intensity running, which would be true.

The funny thing is, you don't see sprinters continuing to do flying 30s off 5 minutes rest and 3x150 off 20 minutes recovery then professing that endurance is an untrainable characteristic. They clearly understand that it's just not the goal of the sessions that they are doing.

I noticed you said doing the flat out hill sprints and track sprints after a tempo run. Does that increase or limit the benefit of doing them? I always thought being totally fresh and doing it on an easy light day would mean one can run them faster than after a workout - even a controlled and moderate one.

Contact Coach JS

Thank you, please tell any sprinter out there, to stop training as it does not work.

The thing is is that most of these skinny distance runners have never actually tried running fast. They say they don’t have any sprint speed. That’s because they are out everyday doing 10 mile runs. Or they do the sprints after the 10 mile run.

Running fast in practice will not kill your endurance. It will make running race pace easier.

Before his breakout season in 1977, he did a lot of basic sprint training along with circuits and weights with George Gandy during the winter. He had about a 110m steep hill he would run up.

I am always perplexed on why American coaches won’t ever get their athletes to run full speed.

Alabama BSS wrote:

The thing is is that most of these skinny distance runners have never actually tried running fast. They say they don’t have any sprint speed. That’s because they are out everyday doing 10 mile runs. Or they do the sprints after the 10 mile run.

Running fast in practice will not kill your endurance. It will make running race pace easier.

Before his breakout season in 1977, he did a lot of basic sprint training along with circuits and weights with George Gandy during the winter. He had about a 110m steep hill he would run up.

I am always perplexed on why American coaches won’t ever get their athletes to run full speed.

Top-end speed is genetic. I did the same workouts as other runners on my team and some could run 52 while I couldn't break 60. If your hill workout could have helped me run 56, it seems the 52 second guys could have done the thing, improved to 48 and then run a 3:50 mile.

So, you are saying that since you were doing the same workouts as your teammates, you all should have run exact same times in distances as well. Did that happen?

As you well know, the better you are, the lesser space for improvement. Maybe 52 sec had already done some sprint-ish training in highschool, maybe played soccer or basketball, or maybe he could have improved to 50, who knows. I would say that it's obviously more likely that 60sec guy will cut few seconds, then 52sec guy. Those are completely different times.