Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch
 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Training Talk
Probably a stupid question...
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Anselm Murphy
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 May 2001
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2002 5:20 am    Post subject: Probably a stupid question... Reply with quote

I've always been confused by this... if a running track is 400m long, I had always assumed each straight is 100 and each curve is 100, adding up to make 400. But... then why is it that 100m sprinters start a bit back from the start of the curve? Is it because the straights are slightly less than 100m and the curves are slightly more? My suspicions were first aroused when I managed to run the "100m" in 11.62, which I know I can't do!
So, I probably look like a real half-wit n0w, but could someone please explain this to me?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Distance_Guru
World Class
World Class


Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 1280
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2002 5:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well the answer to your question is yes and no. If I'm not mistaken the finish line is placed before the start of the curve and therefore the start of the 100m has to be pulled back accordingly. Although I'm not 100% on that one. One thing I do know is that not all tracks are the same shape. What I mean by that is that some tracks have longer straitaways and sharper turns than others. Many of these are older tracks that originally had fewer lanes. Emporia State in Kansas for example. That stadium was built around a track that I believe was six lanes and in order to update it and add lanes they had two options. On was that they could tear down the stands along one or both straight aways. Which would have been quite a bit of work since they were made with good quaility old fashioned limestone blocks. Or they could just extend the straightaways and narrow the turns to make up for the added lanes. This is what they did. The result is a track that looks longer than normal. Because it's straightaways are longer than normal while it's curves are sharper.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2002 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DG is correct. Within reason, there's no guarantee of the length of the curves and straights, relatively. The key is where the lines are painted. Some tracks are rotated well into the curve or straight, making the start/finish line and the 300m line nowhere near lined up across the track.

If you think you ran a 100m much faster than you are capable of, try to determine that you ran from the correct line. There will probably be a 110m line just beyond the real 100m line, but I'm not sure what else would be in the area. Perhaps an 80m hurdles (youth) line?

At a comfortably brisk walking pace, one stride for me is almost exactly one meter, so I can walk off 100m within about 6 inches of accuracy. Makes it easy to set up cone workouts when the measuring wheel is nowhere to be found...

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Anselm Murphy
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 May 2001
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2002 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems to me that it takes longer to run the curves than it does to run the straights. But my "track" is basically a none-to-flat field, with a very feint track painted on which has now begun to fade so you can't even see it in places. It could just be the general crappiness of my track. On a standard track, like the one they are using in Munich now:
straights = ?
curves = ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2002 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

On a high profile track like the one in Munich, I'd be shocked if the straights and curves were not equal in distance. There are actually a rather strict set of rules that must be followed in track design and measurement for international purposes.

Lots of interesting little tidbits pop up, like lane 1 being a different distance than the other lanes by design...

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Anselm Murphy
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 May 2001
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2002 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So... on a high profile track, like in Munich, will each straight and each curve be exactly 100m?
If so, then why do the 100m sprinters start from a little bit back from the start of the straight?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2002 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As stated above, there's no reason for the finish line to correspond exactly to the end of the straight. If it did, runners would have to start turning immediately after crossing the line, which can cause collisions in the sprints.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Anselm Murphy
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 May 2001
Posts: 69

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I looked at the track again, and walking back from the finish line, I see that the straight goes on past the start of the curve on the opposite end, for about 10m ish - would this be the start line for 110m? it seems to be the furthest back line. I walked forwards roughly 10 paces from there, and found a feint line (the track is really bad) - could this be the 100m start? I've tried running from this line a few times and keep getting around 11.4 to 11.6 times. I never do any sprint training, so isnt that a bit unusual? - I would have expected more like 12.5 or 13. It seems like I might still be running from the wrong line.

Still, I actually like sprinting now, so what would be a good way to train to get better at the 100m?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2002 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those lines sound as likely as anything, but I'd still walk off the whole "100m" to see if the track is remotely accurate... Anytime you run 100m a full second faster than expected, either your expectations are way too low or something's askew. Smile

Quote:
Still, I actually like sprinting now, so what would be a good way to train to get better at the 100m?

Lots of strength work -- legs, abs, and upper body -- is a key for power and core stability. There are lots of plyometric drills that can help develop proper running mechanics, which allows you to relax better and hold speed. And of course, lots of good ol' fashioned intense sprint intervals of varying distance. Some should be longer than 100m to develop speed endurance, but a lot of it should be shorter (30-60m) for speed development.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group