How would a 17.01sec race in the 150m convert to the 100m? I think it should be a low 11.xx sec. Am I right?
Is a 150m race “convertible” into a 100m estimation at all?
Charlie can you help? Or anyone else?
11.29
that is according to the mercier scoring table which is taken from hunderds and thousands of athletes data at the national level.
QUIKAZHELL, you have the URL to the mercier table?
My best time for the 150m is 17.0 and my best for the 100m is 11.3 and I was in simliar shape for both, so there you go- 11.3!
Remember though that different athletes have different strengths and weaknesses. You could run a rapid 150 but if your start and acceleration are crap them your 100 won’t be up to par. Similarly you could have weak SE and therefore run a good 150, but have a great start and the ability to hold to 100. These tables show the range in which you ought to be running, but you’ve got to take your own individual differences into account.
In 2005 my first com. was 150m and I ran 17,08e. Next week was my first 100m and time was 11.31e So you can count… My best over 100m is 10,95e so I think I am capable 16,40.
I’d like to run a 150m and a 300m to see how it relates to my 100 and 200 times. I have been looking at open meets around the London area, but so far no luck! I would say a 300 would give you less indication of a 200 or 400 time than a 150 does for a 100 or 200, partly due to the greater difference in distance, also because of the fact that lactic tolerance becomes far more of a factor as you go over 200, and therefore it cvould cause a lot of variation.