FAT timing = Fully Automatic Timing. This is how your 100m time will be timed in a meet with electronic timing system that starts when the pistol goes off. So the runner has to react to the gun, then trips a sensor at the finish line that stops the timer to get your FAT time. Much more accurate than a handtime wouldn’t you say?
For any time to be considered legal it has to be timed this way. Anyone can say they run so and so time, but the electronic time is the proof.
According to the article, someone with elite genetics would typically be able to run 4.1 for 30m and 11.64 100m at an age of 13-14 years (untrained).
An untrained 17-18yo with good genetics would be expected to be able to run 100m in 11.15 seconds.
The article also states that attempting to predict sprinting talent based entirely on untrained times is very inaccurate. More accurate predictions can be made when the rate of improvement over the first 18 months of training is also taken into account.
Attempting to judge your absolute potential before you have even trained for a year is probably futile.
i have ran 2.68 for 20m and 3.84 for 30m electronic with a touch pad under hand from a 3 point stance, and ive never broke 11 seconds in the 100m. Lol. So dont get too excited, great acceleration doesnt mean the fitness to hold speed or even have great top end speed needed for 100m.
This is so true especially for the athletes who focus exclusively on lifting, jumping, and 30m sprints (which seems to be a majority of the people here).
To fix this apparent pandemic:
Increase your work capacity (general work, tempo volumes, etc)
race in meets (100m & 200m) regularly during the season!
I think I work at the other end of the spectrum regarding people here. However, I would argue that I am very speed based in comparison to many coaches in the UK. My relative strengths are the latter parts of my race though.
Well said, as far as it goes. But, people could listen to Charlie and move speed out to 60’s and SE out to 80-120 (or 80-100-120-150 as CF said recently). Naw, too easy. You wouldn’t want to run like Ben, would you?
The other thing I see here is dependence on 20-30m starts and flys as short as 10m, all of which are fraught with error, even if you have something like Brower. So when I’m by myself without a timer, I do the opposite of what most everyone else does. I simply ignore the first 10 meters and project from 10-100 or 10-60.
Data from the 2006 USATF 100m final:
Everybody but Gatlin:
0-10m 100m
1.94-1.98 10.30-10.44
Gatlin:
0-10m 100m
1.90 9.99
So I just take the 10-100 time and divide by .81 or take the 10-60 time and divide by 0.7. And remember, these are FAT times.
This is going to miss something if you have poor block clearance (although you won’t reach as high a speed by 10m if this is the case), but it’s probably more accurate than other things you can do by yourself. Also note that the USATF training splits charts have projections from 60 & 90m flys, which, once again, reduces the relative error.
I’m not saying don’t do 30s and practice your starts, and John Smith does time starts as short as 10m close to comp, but during Phase II and III, I don’t even bother timing them.
well as a long jumper im not at all focussed on running a good 100m…but having said that, relatively speaking my acceleration upto 30m by far is better than my best electronic fly 10m on 0.94 (avg 0.99)…
so maybe this extra long speed concentration would be much better for me…
What’s up today I’ve run 30 m dash 3.74/3.77 handtimed from my 1st movemnt the low start
out of no blocks in a crappy shoes, on asphalt in the same stadium. Should I aprroach the couch? I know that in my city a couple of good sprinters if you heard of Alexander Ryabov and Mikhail Egorichev.
If I could hold the speed through out with the good technics what time could I have showed in 100 m?