I’d do the split runs in spikes
why? Because they should be run faster?
i been running them at 85% based on where i tihnk i am at now 22.0 and 11.0.
should i go 90%? which would be 24.4 and 12.2?
I just happened to read this thread this afternoon, and decided to try them out today. I was scheduled for split runs today, but I decided to do these instead today. I thought the volume for today wasa little high anyway. So I added this set of split runs to my library, and just moved the ones I had scheduled back. On the 1st one it felt as if I was running with resistance. It felt like I couldn’t get my legs to go up and down for some reason. And every thing was so stiff. But I guess that always happens on the 1st rep anyway. But today seemed exaggerated.
200 - 25.9/100 - 13.3 = 39.7
200 - 24.7/100 - 12.2 = 36.9
200 - 24.07/100 - 11.87 = 35.94
I took 1:30 between reps(walk back), and 8min between sets. I just walked a lap around the track and drank some water, then relaxed a bit. As you can see the 1st one was a lot slower than the next 2. The 100m in the 2nd was by far the hardest. I couldn’t even lick my lips after that one. And I have a cold too, so that didn’t help. The last 200 was the hardest of the 3.
I did mine in spikes. I feel like wearing shoes, would cause me to run at a higher % than I planned. 85% in spikes is probably more like 90% in trainers. So for this type of workout i’ll wear spikes.
I think i’m starting to form a bad habit though. During the last two 200’s I started slowing down with about 15m to go. I know I should be running through the line, but I think it’s a blessing in disguise. You see if I ran through the line I would have run 23 or close to 23. And I don’t want to. I think slowing down kinda helped me to stay at a certain %. Isn’t it terrible though, how i’m makin excuses just so I can slack off at the end of a run 
lol
The original plan for today was…
350-60, 50, 40
250-60, 50, 40
150-60, 50, 40
But I caught a cramp in my hammy on monday, doing some short acc work. And I was kinda worried about hurting my leg. So I thought doing 100m instead of 60, 50, 40’s would be nice for my hammy.
Try to make your runs as even as possible (right through) so you know what the impact of the run really is. If you vary the speed, you may not remember how you achieved your times for comparison purposes. it also sounds a bit like you may not have been warm enough at the start, though the “step down” times were good.
Interesting info and nice improvment quik!
hmm spikes for split runs. Sounds a little early to me but I might try it. I have to limit my spike work due to my damn heel
Chris
ok I have now read all these posts and cant work out why you blokes arent running faster for the 200m if your 200m pb is quicker.
is this a 400m thing 
If I did a split run I would try to do both runs at 95% (or at least the first 200m then hold on for the 100m).
Is that right for a 100m/200m guy?
Aussie, i’m actually guessing at how fast I am. I haven’t run a race in almost 2 years. So I really don’t know if the % i’m using are accurate. But I have a pretty good idea of what i’m capable of. I thnk i’m faster than I was a few years back, but i’m in nowhere near as good a shape. And i’m a 200/400 runner. I believe Chris & Quick are both 100/200 guys.
And I don’t believe that you should try to do both runs at 95%. I think the 2nd part of the split is the most important. As Charlie mentioned before. And to do a 200 at 95% is asking for a slow 100m. You might do the 1st one fast, but all the rest will probably be slower from then on.
aussie,
im a 100/200 sometimes 400/ long jumper. my personal best are 21.2 and 10.6 hand time. Last summer after a year off because of injury i ran 22.0 hand time. Right now i am using 22.0 as my time to base my run times off of. 90% is 24.4 and 90% of 11.0 is 12.2. That is just under what i was runnign them in and i was running them in sneakers.
thanks for you replies guys but I thought the 200m would be quicker thats all. I base my 200m runs off about 22.0 but I would try and run it in 95% which is 23.1.
The hundred would then be just run with good technique.
Why do it at 90% and why concentrate on the second part of the split run?
if i run it any faster my 100 will suffer even more… Charlie perhaps you can og into details why this would be bad?
Also i dont know how u do it but i take 90 seconds between the 100 and 200 and 7 mins between sets. If i went 95% i wouldnt be consistent after the first set.
I also did the split runs this weeK. I was on a grass track, and I wore spikes.
I did 2 fairly even runs but I didn’t have the fitness to do the 3rd one at the same pace. I had 10 minutes in between sets and 90 seconds between reps.
After the first set I found that although my breathing returned to normal after a few minutes, my heartbeat was still really fast even as I started the second set, needless to say I was wasted after the second set.
200 - 25/100 - 13
200 - 25/100 - 13
200 - 27/100 - 14
I found them very hard work. It’s great practise for relaxing and keeping form while fatigued.
i would do them how i thought everyone was supposed to do them…
full recovery between sets!
charlie?
dont confuse SE with split runs they are different.
You would not be able to run 95% for 200 and 95% for 100 with 90 seconds rest consistently over multiple sets. It wouldnt be possible with the 8-10 minute rest period perscribed.
I am going to do these again early next week on the outdoor track. I’ll post my results here.
Cheers,
Chris
Just for a little clarification. I understand that split runs and speed endurance are different but why would Charlie have you performing the split runs in spikes? What is exactly the purpose of split runs? Chris are you also doing speed endurance right now?
This past summer my coach had me do a full speed 200 with 1 minute rest followed up by a second 200. I went through the first in 21.8, but the second in 26.1 (if I remember correctly) the goal being to simulate a 400. My training partner also did the first 200 in 21.8 but followed it with a 24.1 showing his superior speed endurance, and hence I guess the reason we did the broken 400, to improve SE. We only did one set.
I guess my question is why do split runs when you could do speed endurance, start at a short distance and move up. For instance Chris you could do a broken 200 (100+100) with 90 seconds rest and full recovery for say 3 sets. If you did this for 3-4 weeks you could move up to a broken 300 and eventually a broken 400. Wouldn’t this be more specific and hence better than split runs that are done in that 80%-90% range that Charlie advises against?
I am not saying any of this on anything resembling firm footing and will gladly appreciate any corrections, for we are all here to learn right, but this is what I understand the purpose of speed endurance to be.
Thanks guys.
(But regardless good luck in your split runs Chris and Quik, hope you guys keep improving at them)
juggies,
good post. what are your pr’s?
Thanks Quik,
I am glad I didn’t come off as a jerk but I truly am a student of the sport and want to understand why we train and how it benefits us.
Haha I’m going to qualify my pbs, cause I “officially” don’t like them. I had a really unfortunate outdoor season this year in terms of wind in which I got virtually no neutral winds. So my legal pb is 11.05(0.2) from 2002 but this past summer I ran 10.82(+2.5), 10.89(3.1) and 10.94(2.7) and 11.10(-1.5) so I like to consider myself a 10.9 runner. In the 200 my legal pb is 22.30 and my wind-aided best is 21.98(3.6). I only ran one 400 last year at 50.29, but plan on moving up this year. Also I ran a 35.15 outdoor 300.
Indoors my pbs are 60-7.07, 200-22.66, 300-35.47
Thanks for the interest. I hope to hit 6.9…6.8 if all this hard work pays off and maybe a 22.0-22.1 (or dream goal of 21.9) indoors. 300 the goal is 34.5.
those are good PB’S. Similar to mine actually.
How did you run a 21.8 in training isnt that a bit faster than your legal pr?
It was a handtime
Your post didnt come off as bad at all 
I have performed mine in flats so far not in spikes though I might try them in spikes tomorrow.
I think 100+100 with 90 seconds rest wouldn’t work well for me.
The target of the split run for me is too teach myself to run quickly (at a higher intensity) while fatigued.
If I did the first 100 at 95% with only 90 seconds rest I would never be able to match or exceed that pace.
I want the second run to be faster than the first but still under fatigue. I am going to do these tomorrow and post my results. I have been a little infrequent with my training the last two weeks so I hope I haven’t lost too much. (Death in the family and then came down with a cold)
I might wear spikes tomorrow but am trying to limit my spike work to the shorter runs for now. (Still have a slight heel injury I am rehabbing)
Cheers,
Chris