[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on December 22, 2008 at 10:41 pm #15190

EDIT: This post was split from THIS THREAD[/url] on sled pulling.

[quote author="Nick Newman" date="1229475705"]the way i see it, is your push very hard while using a sled to extend your stride as much as you can while still accelerating…

I’ve found this transfers very well into having a large stride in normal sprinting and having a poweful push back on each stride.

this is what i said…nothing attacking, nothing personal…just my thoughts…

then he had check a video of me (like im the model for sprinting) what the fuck ? then you all say im to blame?

And, how many guys in the world have ever ran 6.4’s for the 60m? let me guess you coached all of them?

I have a blog on here which i can take off at any point i want to…for all of your enjoyment etc etc…kinda risky too though becuase im putting myself out there…

but im not the one putting up coaching blogs every other day promoting myself as a coach on a site that isnt even mine! so do not talk about me again.

And, its funny you talk about my acceration…i have ran 2.48 electronic for 20m, and 3.83 for 30m (differet protocol than the 20m test). I beleive Donavan Bailey the year he broke the 100m WR ran the 3.79??? doing the same test…clearly, as Mike has stated my accel ability is good.[/quote]

I wanted to post on this one a while back but I just forgot.

Did I read this one right in that you ran .04 slower than Donovan Bailey??? The former world record holder??? If that truly is the case, I think you’re competing in the wrong event.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 23, 2008 at 9:11 am #75640

Did I read this one right in that you ran .04 slower than Donovan Bailey??? The former world record holder??? If that truly is the case, I think you’re competing in the wrong event.

The key is the distance (30m). I could tell you another jumper who you have never heard of and never will hear of who ran FASTER than Bailey’s time over 30m.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Nick Newman]

Nick Newman on December 23, 2008 at 9:26 am #75641

Yes…30m is VERY MUCH different than 100m…Surely you know that?

I know some jumpers you can run a fly 10m is 0.87-90 but DO NOT break 10.90 when they run a 100m race…

It’s all relative and specific to the distance ran.

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on December 27, 2008 at 8:04 am #75776

Yes…30m is VERY MUCH different than 100m…Surely you know that?

I know some jumpers you can run a fly 10m is 0.87-90 but DO NOT break 10.90 when they run a 100m race…

It’s all relative and specific to the distance ran.

I understand that 30m is more relevant to jumping than 100m. I’m just wondering what happens at the 30 meter mark? What might you be able to put together for a 20 meter fly?

[Kebba Tolbert]

Kebba Tolbert on December 27, 2008 at 10:45 am #75780

it really depends on **how** you got to 30m. What PJ, Carl, and Mike are saying is that 30m is only one indicator of ability. So using a predictor of other things is not necessarily valid because good throwers can blast a 30m but couldn’t run a great 60m, much less a 100m.

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on December 27, 2008 at 10:58 am #75781

[quote author="mr glove" date="1229965925"]
Did I read this one right in that you ran .04 slower than Donovan Bailey??? The former world record holder??? If that truly is the case, I think you’re competing in the wrong event.

The key is the distance (30m). I could tell you another jumper who you have never heard of and never will hear of who ran FASTER than Bailey’s time over 30m.[/quote]

KT,

As I recall Nick is not a thrower but a 175 pound long jumper so his body time should allow top speed abilities. Much different than Brian Oldfield mashing out a 30m.I have a hard time believing that people are running world class 30m times but fail to have a international level 60m.

[Kebba Tolbert]

Kebba Tolbert on December 27, 2008 at 11:15 am #75782

I definately know of jumpers who can run world class 30m times but could not make the NCAA meet at 60m. I can think of 2-3 off of my head. That said, I had a hammer thrower last yr that could run almost the same 30m time as our girl who won the Big Sky 100m, but could not have make our conference final over 60m.

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on December 27, 2008 at 11:25 am #75783

Then what the heck happens between 30-40m based on Nick’s testing results? What are coaches doing with talents that run WC accelerations but fail to put together 30-60m? You think Tom Tellez would fail to get guys to run good 100m times if LJers were running that fast when we know that bounding and jumping is a high correlation to max velocity?

[mortac8]

mortac8 on December 27, 2008 at 11:36 am #75784

Then what the heck happens between 30-40m based on Nick’s testing results? What are coaches doing with talents that run WC accelerations but fail to put together 30-60m? You think Tom Tellez would fail to get guys to run good 100m times if LJers were running that fast when we know that bounding and jumping is a high correlation to max velocity?

Maybe they’re utilizing the 7 second valsalva maneuver.

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 27, 2008 at 11:42 am #75785

Then what the heck happens between 30-40m based on Nick’s testing results? What are coaches doing with talents that run WC accelerations but fail to put together 30-60m? You think Tom Tellez would fail to get guys to run good 100m times if LJers were running that fast when we know that bounding and jumping is a high correlation to max velocity?

Carl:

You are onto something I have been looking at for the past 2 years with some uncertainty, but Mike’s videos of Tellez, Judge, and Pfaff are making it all come together. There is a high correlation (.80 or so) of 30m time to 60m or 100m time between athletes of similar abilities and skill. However, 30m time is correlated (.70) to initial impulse as well, but initial impulse and 100m time are not highly correlated (.30). This has led me to believe that certain profiles (stereotypes) exist for certain athletes at a certain level. Thinking of Nick’s videos of his 30m and clean was brought to my mind when Pfaff was discussing catching Olympic Lifts in all 3 videos of his.

The attached PDF offers a profile of an elite 100m dash in terms of velocity, acceleration, and jerk in the 100m dash (curves where fitted with a cubic spline). If anyone has data on athletes running slower times and their split data please find a way to supply me with the information.

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on December 27, 2008 at 11:52 am #75787

it really depends on **how** you got to 30m. What PJ, Carl, and Mike are saying is that 30m is only one indicator of ability. So using a predictor of other things is not necessarily valid because good throwers can blast a 30m but couldn’t run a great 60m, much less a 100m.

It may not be a predictor, but it certainly is a necessary condition.

No man is going to make an NCAA final running 4.20.

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on December 27, 2008 at 11:59 am #75788

I definately know of jumpers who can run world class 30m times but could not make the NCAA meet at 60m. I can think of 2-3 off of my head. That said, I had a hammer thrower last yr that could run almost the same 30m time as our girl who won the Big Sky 100m, but could not have make our conference final over 60m.

For the first part of your post, why do they fall apart?

For the second part, numbers would make it easier for me to understand.

Thanks!

[Kebba Tolbert]

Kebba Tolbert on December 27, 2008 at 12:16 pm #75789

it may not be that they are falling apart but simply that just don’t have very good top speed capacity. One is more related to absolute strength vs. dynamic strength.

3.89 is a good (not great 30m). But a 2.77 30m fly is outstanding. I’ve had 4 or 5 kids who could run close to 3.90 or under, but only one who could fly 2.77.

My hammer thrower could run 4.45 for 30m, but I also had a girl who could run about 11.80 that ran 4.45.

I also had a sprinter that ran 7.54/11.79 that ran about 4.41. In the same year I had a jumper that ran 4.41. The jumper could barely break 8.00 for 60m.

[mortac8]

mortac8 on December 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm #75793

Carl:

You are onto something I have been looking at for the past 2 years with some uncertainty, but Mike’s videos of Tellez, Judge, and Pfaff are making it all come together. There is a high correlation (.80 or so) of 30m time to 60m or 100m time between athletes of similar abilities and skill. However, 30m time is correlated (.70) to initial impulse as well, but initial impulse and 100m time are not highly correlated (.30). This has led me to believe that certain profiles (stereotypes) exist for certain athletes at a certain level. Thinking of Nick’s videos of his 30m and clean was brought to my mind when Pfaff was discussing catching Olympic Lifts in all 3 videos of his.

The attached PDF offers a profile of an elite 100m dash in terms of velocity, acceleration, and jerk in the 100m dash (curves where fitted with a cubic spline). If anyone has data on athletes running slower times and their split data please find a way to supply me with the information.

What is jerk time?

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm #75795

[quote author="dbandre" date="1230358385"]
Carl:

You are onto something I have been looking at for the past 2 years with some uncertainty, but Mike’s videos of Tellez, Judge, and Pfaff are making it all come together. There is a high correlation (.80 or so) of 30m time to 60m or 100m time between athletes of similar abilities and skill. However, 30m time is correlated (.70) to initial impulse as well, but initial impulse and 100m time are not highly correlated (.30). This has led me to believe that certain profiles (stereotypes) exist for certain athletes at a certain level. Thinking of Nick’s videos of his 30m and clean was brought to my mind when Pfaff was discussing catching Olympic Lifts in all 3 videos of his.

The attached PDF offers a profile of an elite 100m dash in terms of velocity, acceleration, and jerk in the 100m dash (curves where fitted with a cubic spline). If anyone has data on athletes running slower times and their split data please find a way to supply me with the information.

What is jerk time?[/quote]

Jerk is the derivative of acceleration and 2nd derivative of velocity. In other words its the change in acceleration over time expressed in meters per second cubed.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 27, 2008 at 6:49 pm #75590

What is jerk time?

So much potential for this one but I had to remind myself ET is ‘family friendly.’

ELITETRACK Founder

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 27, 2008 at 6:51 pm #75591

[quote author="mortac8" date="1230364771"]
What is jerk time?

So much potential for this one but I had to remind myself ET is ‘family friendly.’[/quote]

I actually thought you quit reading posts and just started posting random videos in your blog.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 27, 2008 at 6:53 pm #75592

Dan-
Why did you use average velocity in those graphs rather than semi-instantaneous velocity using 10m splits?

ELITETRACK Founder

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 27, 2008 at 6:55 pm #75593

I actually thought you quit reading posts and just started posting random videos in your blog.

haha. Lately, this isn’t too far from the truth. I still try to read posts as much as I can but taking the time to get fully engaged has been one of the things that gets put on the chopping block when I get busy.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 27, 2008 at 6:56 pm #75594

Dan-
Why did you use average velocity in those graphs rather than semi-instantaneous velocity using 10m splits?

It took long enough in the first place and was intended for my site as response to someone who believes they make someone accelerate faster and achieve a higher max velocity and then hold onto max velocity for a longer period of time by accelerating for less time. I was trying to point out to do such a thing just is not possible and for the purposes involved I used average velocity as it takes less time.

I plan on doing that at some point in the future, but I also want some data on runners running less than 11 m/s.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 27, 2008 at 6:59 pm #75817

When I was at LSU, there was a guy who you have NEVER heard of who ran a faster 30m than Bailey’s. He was a LJer (~7.20) who wasn’t even fast enough to make the travel team as a 60m guy and didn’t make an A team 4x100m.

Sure 30m correlates with 60m and top end speed but I think it’s much lower than most would expect. There’s a variety of reasons for this, some of which haven’t been mentioned. I’ll try to touch on them tomorrow evening.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 27, 2008 at 7:06 pm #75819

When I was at LSU, there was a guy who you have NEVER heard of who ran a faster 30m than Bailey’s. He was a LJer (~7.20) who wasn’t even fast enough to make the travel team as a 60m guy and didn’t make an A team 4x100m.

Sure 30m correlates with 60m and top end speed but I think it’s much lower than most would expect. There’s a variety of reasons for this, some of which haven’t been mentioned. I’ll try to touch on them tomorrow evening.

I believe it, there is no doubt in my mind, but I think when it gets down to it trying to compare 30m times has to take into account the population and that’s were you are going to find correlations to 60m and 100m to be higher.

Was it Smoot?

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 27, 2008 at 7:12 pm #75821

No Smoot was a decent athlete but not in the ball park I’m talking about. I’d have to pull out my old test sheets but I want to say he ran 3.76 using a touchpad and brower timing gates.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on December 28, 2008 at 12:19 am #75822

it may not be that they are falling apart but simply that just don’t have very good top speed capacity. One is more related to absolute strength vs. dynamic strength.

3.89 is a good (not great 30m). But a 2.77 30m fly is outstanding. I’ve had 4 or 5 kids who could run close to 3.90 or under, but only one who could fly 2.77.

My hammer thrower could run 4.45 for 30m, but I also had a girl who could run about 11.80 that ran 4.45.

I also had a sprinter that ran 7.54/11.79 that ran about 4.41. In the same year I had a jumper that ran 4.41. The jumper could barely break 8.00 for 60m.

Just to be sure I’m on the same page…for the non-sprint group, how are we testing this 30m?

I had one athlete who, in indoor competition, would usually run 4.02, but come back in 2.72-2.75. Certainly points to the need to get stronger.

Being that, as we work our way back to the starting line, the emphasis on strength increases, it makes sense that the stronger male thrower could hang with the weaker female sprinter.

To tie this into some of the Dan Pfaff lectures Mike posted, how can we say that an athlete capable of a sub 3.90 doesn’t possess enough dynamic strength? With repeated exposure to fly-in work, might you expect the gap to close?

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on December 28, 2008 at 3:45 am #75823

If this Bermuda zone of drop off occurs at 30m why can you train and teach someone who has world class strength qualities to have national level speed after 30m? I would love to see video with 10m segments of this for 60m and see what happens in detail. Sounds a bit hard to swallow.

What population has drop dead speed after 30m and what about speed endurance? Are they that fast twitch that they die after 30m and that dynamically weak they can put together a decent 30m fly? And if this genetic issue exists shouldn’t people just quit track and field? It can’t be changed and if it can it’s not enough.

[premium]

premium on December 28, 2008 at 5:21 am #75824

there’s definitely a correlation but just because you have one doesn’t mean you have the other, for example someone that beats you in the 55 or 60 during winter, and you come back in spring and beat them in the hundred there’s all the indoor 60m runners that don’t break 10 and it clear they have good acceleration capabilities

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on December 28, 2008 at 5:37 am #75826

We are not talking about 30m runs and marathons but even 10m later! We are not just talking about 30 and 100m times but 30-60m after a world class 30m performance and why are athletes blowing up after that distance when they are training for track. I don’t care about throwers as I didn’t bring it up. I am talking about LJ bodies (175 pounds) that bound and jump great that can’t hold a decent fly? If you can’t do a fly of 30m and old .92 splits something is wrong as I never see world class bodies that are that elastic challenged unless injury or rare abnormal issue is present.

[star61]

star61 on December 28, 2008 at 6:07 am #75827

Sure 30m correlates with 60m and top end speed but I think it’s much lower than most would expect. There’s a variety of reasons for this, some of which haven’t been mentioned. I’ll try to touch on them tomorrow evening.

I would imagine the corrleation exists because most, if not all, top 100m sprinters run a good 30m. As previous posters have stated, that doesn’t mean everyone that can run a good 30m can run a good 100m. It would be interesting to break out two end members; those with great 30m times and horrible 100m times, and those that run great at both ends. Is there a discernable difference in stature, stride length, strength indicators, etc? Has anyone seen this in the literature?

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on December 28, 2008 at 7:06 am #75833

[quote author="Mike Young" date="1230384616"]Sure 30m correlates with 60m and top end speed but I think it’s much lower than most would expect. There’s a variety of reasons for this, some of which haven’t been mentioned. I’ll try to touch on them tomorrow evening.

I would imagine the corrleation exists because most, if not all, top 100m sprinters run a good 30m. As previous posters have stated, that doesn’t mean everyone that can run a good 30m can run a good 100m. It would be interesting to break out two end members; those with great 30m times and horrible 100m times, and those that run great at both ends. Is there a discernable difference in stature, stride length, strength indicators, etc? Has anyone seen this in the literature?[/quote]

Correlations exist between athletes in the same narrow population defined by abilities and skill level. I think when you look at elite sprinters you see commonalities between them expressed in such things as the curves I posted. Its those commonalities you are training for not the differences. In the case of curves I posted, it’s a large initial impulse and spending more than 6s accelerating to max velocity. Therefore developmentally a sprinter creates a larger initial impulse which causes a higher rate of acceleration which in term should lead to spending more time in acceleration if qualities like stiffness are increased during transition reducing jerk which should slow the athletes approach to zero acceleration or max velocity. The segment between 30-60m is more about.

[PJ Vazel]

PJ Vazel on December 28, 2008 at 7:18 am #75834

If this Bermuda zone of drop off occurs at 30m why can you train and teach someone who has world class strength qualities to have national level speed after 30m? I would love to see video with 10m segments of this for 60m and see what happens in detail. Sounds a bit hard to swallow.

What population has drop dead speed after 30m and what about speed endurance? Are they that fast twitch that they die after 30m and that dynamically weak they can put together a decent 30m fly? And if this genetic issue exists shouldn’t people just quit track and field? It can’t be changed and if it can it’s not enough.

This is a visual and classic example of someone who had awsome 0-30m and low par 30-60m, Yoshioka in lane 1.
On the other hand, in 2007 you have Churandy Martina in Osaka, 4.05 for the first 30m (that’s what a few girls have done in history) and 2.59 for the 30-60m (that’s what a few guys have done in history).

Regarding corelation between 0-30m and 30-60m in competition, it is not significant, around r=0.3 for sub10.20 performers.

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on January 2, 2009 at 2:36 am #75965

[quote author="Carl Valle" date="1230416125"]If this Bermuda zone of drop off occurs at 30m why can you train and teach someone who has world class strength qualities to have national level speed after 30m? I would love to see video with 10m segments of this for 60m and see what happens in detail. Sounds a bit hard to swallow.

What population has drop dead speed after 30m and what about speed endurance? Are they that fast twitch that they die after 30m and that dynamically weak they can put together a decent 30m fly? And if this genetic issue exists shouldn’t people just quit track and field? It can’t be changed and if it can it’s not enough.

This is a visual and classic example of someone who had awsome 0-30m and low par 30-60m, Yoshioka in lane 1.
On the other hand, in 2007 you have Churandy Martina in Osaka, 4.05 for the first 30m (that’s what a few girls have done in history) and 2.59 for the 30-60m (that’s what a few guys have done in history).

Regarding corelation between 0-30m and 30-60m in competition, it is not significant, around r=0.3 for sub10.20 performers.[/quote]

Was this race typical for Martina? Is a differential of almost 1.50 seconds something that he aims for?

How many sub10.20 performers go out in 4.00 or slower?

I’d be curious to know if anyone’s ever looked at the relationship between long jump performance and sprint ability?

[RussZHC]

RussZHC on January 2, 2009 at 5:46 am #75972

The Martina numbers are mentioned are interesting if you plug them into
Dick’s “Control Table” for 100/200m athletes.

Good, really good, 100/200m FAT off the charts good. (Using IAAF Top list for the 100/200)

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 2, 2009 at 6:36 am #75976

[quote author="Carl Valle" date="1230416125"]If this Bermuda zone of drop off occurs at 30m why can you train and teach someone who has world class strength qualities to have national level speed after 30m? I would love to see video with 10m segments of this for 60m and see what happens in detail. Sounds a bit hard to swallow.

What population has drop dead speed after 30m and what about speed endurance? Are they that fast twitch that they die after 30m and that dynamically weak they can put together a decent 30m fly? And if this genetic issue exists shouldn’t people just quit track and field? It can’t be changed and if it can it’s not enough.

This is a visual and classic example of someone who had awsome 0-30m and low par 30-60m, Yoshioka in lane 1.
On the other hand, in 2007 you have Churandy Martina in Osaka, 4.05 for the first 30m (that’s what a few girls have done in history) and 2.59 for the 30-60m (that’s what a few guys have done in history).

Regarding corelation between 0-30m and 30-60m in competition, it is not significant, around r=0.3 for sub10.20 performers.[/quote]

Errors or Execution in a guy in the 1930s is an outlier. A percentage that represents an unlikely representation of norms. Martina may have gone 4.05 in the first 30m would that be the most likely to be influenced by lack of strength? The next question with this glaring first 30m is this the average, best, or worst first 30m for Martina. Finally since it’s rather slow will this be addressed or has he peaked in ability?

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 2, 2009 at 6:51 am #75977

PJV,

What about sub 10 performances? As the athlete get’s closer to the ten second barrier the less likely you will see contrast as 80% of the top sub 10 athletes had split times that were not significant in disparity.

CV

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on January 2, 2009 at 8:15 am #75981

Why don’t we look at Martina’s 2007 Osaka performance as sub-optimal and the likely reason he ran 10.08 instead of 9.95 or something similar. His reaction time was part of the problem at .18s which puts him at 3.87s in the first 30m, which is not exceptional for an elite sprinter, but it’s not uncommon for those running 10.1s. The biggest problem I see is his initial impulse is not sufficient for whatever reason, most likely a problem with excessive movements in the transverse direction from excessive force application in the transverse direction (does anyone have frontal or over the top video of this race in the first 20-30m).

[PJ Vazel]

PJ Vazel on January 2, 2009 at 9:48 am #75999

Why don’t we look at Martina’s 2007 Osaka performance as sub-optimal and the likely reason he ran 10.08 instead of 9.95 or something similar. His reaction time was part of the problem at .18s which puts him at 3.87s in the first 30m, which is not exceptional for an elite sprinter, but it’s not uncommon for those running 10.1s. The biggest problem I see is his initial impulse is not sufficient for whatever reason, most likely a problem with excessive movements in the transverse direction from excessive force application in the transverse direction (does anyone have frontal or over the top video of this race in the first 20-30m).

The reason why i don’t look Martina’s 10.08 in Osaka’07 as sub-optimal is that he was only 0.02 off his then-personal best set the same year (i’m talking about low altitude performances). Sure he broke 100m and 200m PBs in 2008, but in Osaka’07 he was at his best with his current abilities. However, Martina displayed same pattern in Bejing (9.93) 1 year later as he was 8th at 30m (like in Osaka) and finished 4th (was 5th in Osaka). As for reaction time, better be cautious with figures because the systems used in WC and OG are different. Could you expand on “initial impulse”? Are you refering to what occuring in starting blocks or first step?

Errors or Execution in a guy in the 1930s is an outlier. A percentage that represents an unlikely representation of norms. Martina may have gone 4.05 in the first 30m would that be the most likely to be influenced by lack of strength? The next question with this glaring first 30m is this the average, best, or worst first 30m for Martina. Finally since it’s rather slow will this be addressed or has he peaked in ability?

In Osaka, my analysis from the data recorded by Seiko shows that Martina had the lowest Fmax, as well as poor speed-force, explosive-force and start-force index.
Yoshioka or Martina are indeed out of the norm but that’s why we are talking about them. That’s not errors in execution but their usual pattern.
In Beijing, the data from Omega was not available due to no agreement with IAAF. However, i doubt there was significant changes in Martina’s pattern regarding his start.
Regarding Martina’s future development, i’m sure he can improve his short comings, to what extent i can’t say.

PJV,
What about sub 10 performances? As the athlete get’s closer to the ten second barrier the less likely you will see contrast as 80% of the top sub 10 athletes had split times that were not significant in disparity.
CV

As for sub10, you can still find significant differences regarding 30m times. Martina is an example. Without giving 30m timings, it is obvious that Spearmon in Shanghai’07 (9.96)and Michael Marsh in Walnut’96 (9.95) took over a clear gap at 30m point to catch the leader (Gay and Boldon, respectively) and win the race in times which were their PB or very close to (in Marsh’ case). I bet the times were high 3.9. For similar 100m times, Jon Drummond or Raymond Stewart (both 9.96) were high 3.7.
We find disparities for the first 30m and last 20m of 100m races, sections between 30 and 80m have no significant disparity.

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 3, 2009 at 8:06 am #76061

PJV,

Some great points but again let’s look at this from a better perspective. Correlations are summaries of trends and outlier information is not the majority. Interesting to bring up what is possible but we care more about what is probable.

You will find brilliant people with IQs at 130 and above and those that are unfortunately with circumstances that render them below 70. I am interested in trying to help the majority of sprinters as special circumstances are rare and will only fit the under 10%.

The real question for today is Nick who has great acceleration (world class) yet his max velocity is not fast enough for him to crack 25 feet yet. If he doesn’t have the ability to get his 30m fly better or other measure of top speed he will never get his long jump world class. So either he has the ability to be top speed fast or he doesn’t it. If he does why isn’t he now. If he doesn’t he should retire and become a WR in the NFL. Not trying to sound harsh but to be elite you must have some sort of top speed and from what I hear from Mike Young is that some guys don’t have top speed period…not a great thing to have for LJ performance.

If Mike is able to bring about great top speed from training why didn’t the other coaches at LSU didn’t do the same things?

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 3, 2009 at 8:10 am #76062

PJV,

What about the history with the first 30 and last 20 being developed for those with poor abilities in that zone? What are the suboptimal qualities that are limiting those zones (first 30 and last 20) and how adaptable are they to coaching and training?

[PJ Vazel]

PJ Vazel on January 3, 2009 at 8:39 am #76066

The real question for today is Nick who has great acceleration (world class) yet his max velocity is not fast enough for him to crack 25 feet yet. If he doesn’t have the ability to get his 30m fly better or other measure of top speed he will never get his long jump world class. So either he has the ability to be top speed fast or he doesn’t it. If he does why isn’t he now. If he doesn’t he should retire and become a WR in the NFL. Not trying to sound harsh but to be elite you must have some sort of top speed and from what I hear from Mike Young is that some guys don’t have top speed period…not a great thing to have for LJ performance.

If Mike is able to bring about great top speed from training why didn’t the other coaches at LSU didn’t do the same things?

The diagnosis might be that Nick is decelerating at some point during that 30m fly zone. In other words, he isn’t able to accelerate far enough to reach top speed far enough to get a 30m fly performance or top speed data matching his long jump target performance.
Maybe the times for 0-10m and 10-20m segments are fine, but maybe Nick is already in trouble from 20m. Here you would look at postures and specific strength requirements. To have a complete picture, you would need to know the time at 30m (most of elite guys are under 3.90) as well as the instantaneous speed at 30m (all elite guys are over 11m/s).
However, ultimately, what matters is how fast Nick is over the final 5m segment (6-1m to the board).

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 3, 2009 at 8:55 am #76069

I agree….most athletes need to progress from 10m -20m and then 30m….

The last 5 meters needs the be fast but you need to get there! If the previous 5m is not fast enough you can’t get that last 5m.

CV

[PJ Vazel]

PJ Vazel on January 3, 2009 at 8:59 am #76071

With this reasoning, the fastest in the middle of the race are the fastest at the start, but this chain reaction isn’t that clear. The progressive acceleration actually lead to a slightly better top speed.

[aivala]

aivala on January 3, 2009 at 10:43 am #76076

I believe Nick once stated that he had some kind of sick 10m time. So he may be able to outsprint a world class sprinter but from 10m on forward he’s caught up. He’s also very strong.

[jstambler]

jstambler on January 3, 2009 at 10:54 am #76077

i was looking at Nick’s training journal and his 10m fly, during testing, are done with 30m run up, so maybe this isnt enough for him to hit top speed and best flying 10m time

[Carl Valle]

Carl Valle on January 3, 2009 at 3:16 pm #76082

What is Nick’s 10m fly? What about 20 and 30?

[jstambler]

jstambler on January 3, 2009 at 3:19 pm #76083

i think his PR is .96, or somewhere near there

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 3, 2009 at 7:42 pm #76100

Nick’s fastest fly 10m is 0.94. That was done with a 30m run-in. We’ve previously tested out to 40m with 10m splits but this requires extra gates that we currently don’t have. I’m not sure how this became about Nick because it’s not as if he’s the fastest LJer in the world and it isn’t unusual that someone can be great through 30m (or even 40m) but not run a great 100m? If everyone who was great through 30m was also great through 100m we’d see no one in the elite long jump because they’d all be sprinting for the money. I would guess that Nick hits top-end around 35m. The fact that I don’t set up the gates exactly where he hits top end is irrelevant in my opinion because 1) he is a LJer with a constrained approach run, 2) there’s far too much variability to predict / determine the exact location of the fastest 10m segment with any accuracy or repeatability, and 3) it would be a logistical nightmare that would not be conducive for testing.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Rich Tolman(mr-glove)]

Rich Tolman(mr-glove) on January 4, 2009 at 1:02 am #76105

Nick’s fastest fly 10m is 0.94. That was done with a 30m run-in. We’ve previously tested out to 40m with 10m splits but this requires extra gates that we currently don’t have. I’m not sure how this became about Nick because it’s not as if he’s the fastest LJer in the world and it isn’t unusual that someone can be great through 30m (or even 40m) but not run a great 100m? If everyone who was great through 30m was also great through 100m we’d see no one in the elite long jump because they’d all be sprinting for the money. I would guess that Nick hits top-end around 35m. The fact that I don’t set up the gates exactly where he hits top end is irrelevant in my opinion because 1) he is a LJer with a constrained approach run, 2) there’s far too much variability to predict / determine the exact location of the fastest 10m segment with any accuracy or repeatability, and 3) it would be a logistical nightmare that would not be conducive for testing.

I understand that there are many guys who are great through 30m, or even 50-60m, and not run a solid 100m. Being from New England, I’ve seen it quite a bit.

For me, it’s not that it’s about Nick from a personal or even long jumping standpoint. It was solely based on his 30m time and what might be possible, not over 100m, but more like 50-60m.

I don’t know much at all about long jumping. What percent of 26-27 foot long jumpers can run 3.83 or faster for 30m? What do they do differently than Nick that allows them to jump farther? Obviously, it’s not a matter of speed.

[aivala]

aivala on January 4, 2009 at 5:41 am #76119

Look at Jonathan Edwards’ training times:

6/6/1995
30m 4.04- 60m 6.87 (4.01)(10.45mps)- 60m 6.84 (4.02)(10.64mps)- 60m 6.95 (4.06)(10.38mps)
20/6/1995
20: 30m 4.02- 60m 6.88 (4.02)(10.48mps)- 60m 6.90 (3.99)(10.30mps)- 60m 6.89 (4.02)(10.45mps)

The speed reading is based on the 30m fly, so it isn’t really his true max v.

His training was based mostly on 60m runs all year round. He doesn’t have a crazy accel yet hits a good max v. I believe that a biomechanical study claimed his speed in Goteborg being measured arround 11 m/s.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 4, 2009 at 5:55 am #76122

For me, it’s not that it’s about Nick from a personal or even long jumping standpoint. It was solely based on his 30m time and what might be possible, not over 100m, but more like 50-60m.

I suspect 6.8x now. 6.7 high if we actually cared, did block work and peaked.

I don’t know much at all about long jumping. What percent of 26-27 foot long jumpers can run 3.83 or faster for 30m? What do they do differently than Nick that allows them to jump farther? Obviously, it’s not a matter of speed.

There are many ways to jump far. Nick and I are well aware that speed is no longer a limiting factor for him right now…at least not to beat his current competition PR.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 4, 2009 at 5:57 am #76124

Look at Jonathan Edwards’ training times:

6/6/1995
30m 4.04- 60m 6.87 (4.01)(10.45mps)- 60m 6.84 (4.02)(10.64mps)- 60m 6.95 (4.06)(10.38mps)
20/6/1995
20: 30m 4.02- 60m 6.88 (4.02)(10.48mps)- 60m 6.90 (3.99)(10.30mps)- 60m 6.89 (4.02)(10.45mps)

The speed reading is based on the 30m fly, so it isn’t really his true max v.

His training was based mostly on 60m runs all year round. He doesn’t have a crazy accel yet hits a good max v. I believe that a biomechanical study claimed his speed in Goteborg being measured arround 11 m/s.

This study is actually on this site. See HERE.[/url] According to this study, he’s no where near 11m/s. He made hop foot touchdown at 9.6m/s which means he was probably not much if any over 10m/s in the last 5m.

ELITETRACK Founder

[PJ Vazel]

PJ Vazel on January 4, 2009 at 10:12 am #76135

Aivala is refering to a study by Dahlberg, co-author of the study linked in your article database. He found run-up velocity as 9.8 for 11m to 6m to the board, and 11.9 from 6m to 1m, which is unbelievable. I think there was a mistake with the 6m mark, as the 11 to 1m average speed, 10.85m/s sounds correct from Edwards other results. In June, he had a 30m fly test as 2.76, worth 10.87m/s. The best speed recording i have for Edward from photocells during TJ run-up is 10.67m/sec for 6m to 1m into a foul jump at 2002 European Champs. For the data collected between 1993 and 2002, Edwards was constant at around 10.2 and 10.6m/s. So i guess his best jumps, over 18m were done with 10.6-10.8m/sec speeds. Going through my stuff in a few minutes, i found only one TJer over 11m/s from photocells measurement, Vlastimil Marinec at WC’83 with 11.06m/s for an effective jump of 17.11m.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 5, 2009 at 4:59 pm #76183

Thanks for clearing that up. The 6m gate has to be wrong as you said. Do you know how the 30/60s from training were timed. I’m assuming using a pressure sensitive hand touch pad? The 30m split times seem extremely slow, especially for someone who goes on to run such a blazing 30m fly.

ELITETRACK Founder