Sprinters running a mile...

Awl --

100 m sprinters -- purely anaerobic, right?

Do you think any of them include distance running at all, for
"crosstraining" purposes? Distance = 1 mile.

Does anyone know what people capable of a 10 sec 100m would run a mile in?

How bout distance runners running the 100m?

Intuition tells me that milers, even marathoners, would do better in the
100m than 100 m people would do in a mile -- cuz, well, they are already
traversing 100 m. huyuk
.. I don't think sprinters could even *complete* a marathon, proly not even
close.

If this is true, the vast asymmetry of the two camps is inneresting....

Opinions?

--
EA

One of my running buddies went to the 400m hurdles olympic trials.

He would hurdle trash cans on our training runs for kicks

He could do mid 32's in the 10k on a good day, 33's on a bad day.
Whenever I was with him near the end of a race, it was no contest

In article
,
John Hurley wrote:

Why don't you find some good strong 100 meter runners and put some cash
on the line and race them in a mile.

I read somewhere that 10K was about the right distance for long distance
runners and track runners to compete in. Longer distances would favor the
LDRs and shorter distances would favor the TRs.

I don't know how true that is, though.

-- Michelle

--
26.2 Because I can

A Sprinter is born and not made. Speed in the sprint events is a gift.
A Sprinter who trains for a mile race could conceivably master this
event. Why? Because he would have the advantage of speed at the most
critical moment, and that is during the finish.
Conversely, a distance runner who does not posses the gift of speed, has
little chance of ever succeeding in the sprint events.

In my youth I was capable of a 10.4 second 100 yard dash. I ran cross
country (a 2 & 1/2 mile event) in the off season and I was among the
top five on the team.

E.A. Williams

"pithydoug" wrote

One of my running buddies went to the 400m hurdles olympic trials.

He would hurdle trash cans on our training runs for kicks

He could do mid 32's in the 10k on a good day, 33's on a bad day.
Whenever I was with him near the end of a race, it was no contest

You kicked his ass??

I only beat him once in a 10k, he was hung over pretty bad and ran a high
33.

Once we were together at mile 5 and he ran a 4:25 final mile on a downhill.
He was like ... gone!

"jobs" wrote in message
...
On 8/16/2010 10:07 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
Awl --

100 m sprinters -- purely anaerobic, right?

Do you think any of them include distance running at all, for
"crosstraining" purposes? Distance = 1 mile.

Does anyone know what people capable of a 10 sec 100m would run a
mile in?

I'd think between 4:00-4:30. But, it's just conjecture.

That's way too fast. Think of the decathlon, where strength is required
for many of the events. They're not pure sprinters, but a comparison of
decathlon records, representing good generalists with a tilt toward
strength, illustrates the difficulty of strength athletes running that
fast, and vice versa somewhat for the milers dropping down to the 100m.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decathlon
100m 10:22
1500m 3:58
Consider that it was the best decathlete sprinter and the best
decathlete 1500 guy setting these times, and these weren't the same
person. Also consider the world record holder's best times:
100m 10.64
1500m 4:22

I think most pure sprinters would be well over 4:30 in the mile (as are
most decathletes) considering that you have to add at least 15? seconds
because the mile is longer than the 1500.

Since some milers are have great kicks, some might go under 11 seconds
for 100m. You can be born with both good sprint speed and a big aerobic
engine, but I think most top sprinters are much more specialized and
would have very low relative VO2maxs, slowing them down dramatically in
events over 400m.

-Tony


How bout distance runners running the 100m?

Intuition tells me that milers, even marathoners, would do better in
the

"better" is a purely subjective term.
E.g., sprinter with 9.87s and 4:19 vs miler with 11.05s and 3:58.
Who is better?

100m than 100 m people would do in a mile -- cuz, well, they are
already
traversing 100 m.huyuk
. I don't think sprinters could even *complete* a marathon, proly
not even
close.

I know people that have "completed" marathons on mileages of 15-20
mpw. I'd guess sprinters probably do 15 mpw or more. I'll guess they
can "complete" a marathon.


If this is true, the vast asymmetry of the two camps is
inneresting....

Opinions?


The "asymmetry" arises because there are too many variables in the
equation and all of them are subject to a subjective standard. Also,
you're comparing speed vs distance. You're trying to see what a 100m
sprinter could do at a distance that is 420 times his usual distance.
Maybe you should use an equally large factor when trying to judge a
marathoner's performance at 100m?

jobs

"Tony S." wrote in message
...
"jobs" wrote in message
...
On 8/16/2010 10:07 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
Awl --

100 m sprinters -- purely anaerobic, right?

Do you think any of them include distance running at all, for
"crosstraining" purposes? Distance = 1 mile.

Does anyone know what people capable of a 10 sec 100m would run a
mile in?

I'd think between 4:00-4:30. But, it's just conjecture.

That's way too fast. Think of the decathlon, where strength is
required for many of the events. They're not pure sprinters, but a
comparison of decathlon records, representing good generalists with a
tilt toward strength, illustrates the difficulty of strength athletes
running that fast, and vice versa somewhat for the milers dropping
down to the 100m.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decathlon
100m 10:22
1500m 3:58
Consider that it was the best decathlete sprinter and the best
decathlete 1500 guy setting these times, and these weren't the same
person. Also consider the world record holder's best times:
100m 10.64
1500m 4:22

Dan Obrien at the 1996 Olympics (gold medal):
100m 10.5
1500m 4:46

I think most pure sprinters would be well over 4:30 in the mile (as
are most decathletes) considering that you have to add at least 15?
seconds because the mile is longer than the 1500.

Since some milers are have great kicks, some might go under 11 seconds
for 100m. You can be born with both good sprint speed and a big
aerobic engine, but I think most top sprinters are much more
specialized and would have very low relative VO2maxs, slowing them
down dramatically in events over 400m.

-Tony


How bout distance runners running the 100m?

Intuition tells me that milers, even marathoners, would do better in
the

"better" is a purely subjective term.
E.g., sprinter with 9.87s and 4:19 vs miler with 11.05s and 3:58.
Who is better?

100m than 100 m people would do in a mile -- cuz, well, they are
already
traversing 100 m.huyuk
. I don't think sprinters could even *complete* a marathon, proly
not even
close.

I know people that have "completed" marathons on mileages of 15-20
mpw. I'd guess sprinters probably do 15 mpw or more. I'll guess they
can "complete" a marathon.


If this is true, the vast asymmetry of the two camps is
inneresting....

Opinions?


The "asymmetry" arises because there are too many variables in the
equation and all of them are subject to a subjective standard. Also,
you're comparing speed vs distance. You're trying to see what a 100m
sprinter could do at a distance that is 420 times his usual distance.
Maybe you should use an equally large factor when trying to judge a
marathoner's performance at 100m?

jobs

"jobs" wrote in message
...
On 8/16/2010 10:07 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
Awl --

100 m sprinters -- purely anaerobic, right?

Do you think any of them include distance running at all, for
"crosstraining" purposes? Distance = 1 mile.

Does anyone know what people capable of a 10 sec 100m would run a mile
in?

I'd think between 4:00-4:30. But, it's just conjecture.


How bout distance runners running the 100m?

Intuition tells me that milers, even marathoners, would do better in the

"better" is a purely subjective term.
E.g., sprinter with 9.87s and 4:19 vs miler with 11.05s and 3:58.
Who is better?

You could come up with some kind of scale, ito perhaps comparing "closeness"
to records, %-wise, expressing a kind of "versatility".

But, I was not so much instigating any bipedal dick-waving, as much as
trying to ascertain "cross-over" effects of various specialties.

What is amazing to me is that marathoners are *already* at a 5 min mile
pace, so wittling that down to 4:00 would not seem to be that much of a
stretch, for a single mile -- altho I do realize the "exponentiality" of
efforts in shaving off seconds.

Mebbe a more interesting way to pose the Q:

At what distance would sprinters and marathoners have approx. equal times?
Sprinters and milers?
Milers and marathoners?

Which I think some have alluded to.

Someone mentioned sprinters putting in 15-20 mpw. That seems like an awful
lot.
--
EA



100m than 100 m people would do in a mile -- cuz, well, they are already
traversing 100 m.huyuk
. I don't think sprinters could even *complete* a marathon, proly not
even
close.

I know people that have "completed" marathons on mileages of 15-20 mpw.
I'd guess sprinters probably do 15 mpw or more. I'll guess they can
"complete" a marathon.


If this is true, the vast asymmetry of the two camps is inneresting....

Opinions?


The "asymmetry" arises because there are too many variables in the
equation and all of them are subject to a subjective standard. Also,
you're comparing speed vs distance. You're trying to see what a 100m
sprinter could do at a distance that is 420 times his usual distance.
Maybe you should use an equally large factor when trying to judge a
marathoner's performance at 100m?

jobs

"John Hurley" wrote in message
...
Tony:

Does anyone know what people capable of a 10 sec 100m would run a
mile in?

I'd think between 4:00-4:30. But, it's just conjecture.

That's way too fast. Think of the decathlon, where strength is
required
for many of the events. They're not pure sprinters, but a comparison
of
decathlon records, representing good generalists with a tilt toward
strength, illustrates the difficulty of strength athletes running that
fast, and vice versa somewhat for the milers dropping down to the
100m.

Remember Tony that the question being posed is "people capable of a 10
sec 100m" ...

I have to think that many of the top decathlon athletes are capable of
going not just between 4 and 4:30 but under 4 minutes at times or at
least on the very low end of the 4's ...for 1500.

Looks like Robert Baker is at 3:58 ... for 1500 ... that puts
decathletes at ( well the top ones ... like sprinters who can run 10
sec 100 meters ) at well into the low 4's.

Jobs looks like you nailed it!


The point I was making is that decathletes are less specialized, and not
as fast at 100m as pure sprinters, and need good 400m and 1500m times to
get the highest point total. So they should be able to run faster 1500m
times than pure sprinters. But the fastest decathlete (who I could not
find a 100m PR for) ran 1500m in 3:58, yes, but that's the equivalent of
a ~4:15 mile, with the vast majority of decathletes running over 4:30 in
competition, while their personal PRs might be slightly lower.

So how does that support Jobs idea that pure sprinters can run a *mile*
in close to 4 minutes? On the contrary, I think pure sprinters would be
slower than decathletes, and I'd suspect none of them could run faster
than the above referenced ~4:15 mile equivalent posted by the best
decathlete 1500m runner, who was probably significantly slower than the
fastest 100m decathlete in the 100m. I think this points to the best
100m runners being able to run perhaps up to 4:30 in some cases, but
most of them are probably slower, even 5 minutes or more; e.g. slower
than decathletes, as a comparison group.

-Tony

A Sprinter can be trained to excel at endurance races. The distance
runner who lacks inherent speed cannot excel in the sprints, regardless
how hard he trains. Sprinters are born and not made. While endurance
for distance races can be acquired through training, there is no
training regimen that will turn the average runner into a world class
sprinter.
Can a world class miler win at the hundred? Without the gift of speed _
NO.

E. A. Williams