In “Sprints in Relays” by Jess Jarver, in an artlicle on the sprint start John Tansley writes… during warming up before a race…
“Tests have shown that the 12th start is the fastest one”.
yet he does not include a reference to this Study. has anyone heard this before. it seems ot me like 12 starts is an awful lot. I think i remember reading somwhere that the 4th start was the best.
has this been brought up before? im not sure because i havent gone thru the old threads on starts… but anyhow…
what does everyone think about "climbing the blocks? (puttin your feet real high on the pedals) i know casey combest used this technique and was successful with it. (6.57 h.s. 60m record.)
Condition 2 was neither a bunch, medium, or elongated start. The athlete was able to place his or her feet out toward the outside edge of the block, similar to the stance you would use doing a vertical jump. It was basically two foot pedals welded together to the actual pedal was wider. Does that help?
Originally posted by Vincente
Discussion of Findings for each Hypothesis:
In Condition 1 the reaction time happened to be the fastest. The reaction time was the slowest in Condition 3. The authors of the study expected Condition 1 to have the fastest reaction time because it is the condition that most athletes use and is highly practiced. The athletes who are used to this condition have established a reaction pattern whereas; this is not the case using the other two Conditions. The authors concluded that the most critical finding was that Condition 2 produced the fastest times at 5 meter, 10 meter, and 30 meters. Condition 1 was able to produce the fastest reaction time but during Condition 2, the athletes were able to reach the 5-meter mark sooner. The authors also noted that during Condition 1 (most common block setting) the greatest deviation from the centerline of the line with the first step occurred. This meant that during Condition 1 the athletes took the largest lateral movement toward the outside of the lane during the first step. This reiterated the observation that most coaches see of their athletes at the start. It is believed that this lateral step is used by the athlete unknowingly at times to regain balance. During Condition 2 the athletes were able to take the longest step directed toward the finish line. This first step was almost directly in line with foot placement of the blocks. The authors believed that this would explain how the athletes were able to reach the 5-meter mark in the shortest amount of time. Condition 3 produced somewhat similar results to those made during Condition 2. The first step was directed more toward the finish line and was slightly shorter. It was concluded that Condition 2 produced the best start.
so what was condition 2? bunch start? elongated? (foot block distances)
thanks
Quick,
Here is something about starts that you may find a little bit more interesting as well as applicable. This is an abstract that I did for one of my classes based on a study that involved changing the width of the foot pedals on the starting blocks and what affect that may have on starts.
Bibliography Entry:
An elite sprinter has always and will continue to search for new ways to improve his or her performance no matter what the costs. One of the techniques that the sprinters of the past would use involved crouching at the start instead of standing. It was common practice amongst most sprinters, to stand while waiting for the gun to go off. It wasn’t until the early 1920’s that an American sprinter competed at the Olympics using a crouched start and in the process, destroyed the rest of the competition. The other competitors noticed how much power one could generate when starting from a lower position. The crouched start was then incorporated into every sprinters program. The crouched start continued to be modified until it became routine to see lanes filled with sprinters with trowels in their hands digging into the dirt track so that they would have something to push off of in order to generate more power in their crouched position. The holes that the sprinters dug allowed them to generate action/reaction forces and decreased the time required to overcome one’s own body weight. One major problem was caused by all of this. The dirt track that all of the runners competed on, was littered with holes which damaged the dirt track. The athletes and coaches went back to the drawing board and after a great deal of thought formulated the construction and use of starting blocks. Many studies have been done on the use of starting blocks and it is agreed that the use of starting blocks can enhance an athlete’s performance but keep in mind that starting blocks were not designed to enhance an athlete’s performance but rather to prevent damage to the track surface. The studies that have been done on starting blocks involved measuring the distance of the feet placement from the line and the angle of the ankle joint in the start position. The study done by Dr. Phillip Henson, Dr. John Cooper and Tom Perry, looks at the actual width of the foot pedals on the starting block and their role in producing the fastest times at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 meters.
Research Problem:
The problem being researched in the Sprint Start study is to determine the best width for the foot pedals on a starting block. As stated in the study, “Almost no data exist that examines the width of the feet placement in the starting position.” The second part of the study was to investigate the observed practice of people stepping out laterally towards the edge of the lane and away from the centerline.
Hypotheses:
The asked the question of whether or not an athletes reaction time would be faster if the block settings allowed the athletes to achieve a position in feet angles similar to that used by most people during a vertical jump. The authors did not seem to favor any particular method, only asked the question. I believe that the athlete’s start will be faster when the feet position is similar to that used by the athlete during his or her vertical jump.
Discussion of Findings for each Hypothesis:
In Condition 1 the reaction time happened to be the fastest. The reaction time was the slowest in Condition 3. The authors of the study expected Condition 1 to have the fastest reaction time because it is the condition that most athletes use and is highly practiced. The athletes who are used to this condition have established a reaction pattern whereas; this is not the case using the other two Conditions. The authors concluded that the most critical finding was that Condition 2 produced the fastest times at 5 meter, 10 meter, and 30 meters. Condition 1 was able to produce the fastest reaction time but during Condition 2, the athletes were able to reach the 5-meter mark sooner. The authors also noted that during Condition 1 (most common block setting) the greatest deviation from the centerline of the line with the first step occurred. This meant that during Condition 1 the athletes took the largest lateral movement toward the outside of the lane during the first step. This reiterated the observation that most coaches see of their athletes at the start. It is believed that this lateral step is used by the athlete unknowingly at times to regain balance. During Condition 2 the athletes were able to take the longest step directed toward the finish line. This first step was almost directly in line with foot placement of the blocks. The authors believed that this would explain how the athletes were able to reach the 5-meter mark in the shortest amount of time. Condition 3 produced somewhat similar results to those made during Condition 2. The first step was directed more toward the finish line and was slightly shorter. It was concluded that Condition 2 produced the best start.
Participants:
The participant was twelve male and twelve female varsity level sprinters and hurdlers. The athletes were from Indiana University and Indiana State University and volunteered to be subjects for the test. Each athlete was required to perform twelve starts over two days of testing. The foot placement spacing of the blocks of the subjects was exactly what they would normally use and was kept for the entire tests.
Measurement or Test Used:
Custom designed Pacer blocks were used and well as a Reactive Time Monitor with an automatic start sequence to determine the reaction time of each start. This device had been programmed to detect any reaction time that was less than .10, which would be considered a false start. If a false start happened, the subject was asked to repeat the trial. The authors also used the Finishlynx system with a strobe light that was turned on by light sensors placed along 5, 10, 15, and 20 meter segments. A grid was also placed on the track that was one meter in length, which was used to measure the foot placement of the subject’s first step out of the blocks.
Suggestions for Future Research:
I truly believe that further studies such as the one above need to be done in order to really find out if an athlete can maximize his or her start by using different foot placement widths. I am amazed that no one has thought of this before and I plan on during personal research myself. I do believe that this test could have been improved by allowing the participants to rest for 24-48 hours between the twelve trials (obviously split up 6 trials on one day and 6 on another). This would allow the athletes sufficient recovery compared to what the authors used which were explosive starts on one day followed by more starts on the next day. The athletes were not allowed sufficient recovery time.
Quick,
There was a study done that demostrated that the 12th start is the fastest. Charlie talks about this in his Vancouver Seminar tapes which I highly suggest you get. Anway, Charlie says in the tape how impractical it is to do twelve starts and that it is much easier, practical, and efficient by just flicking the lead arm out there as if you were doing a start. As we all know, the lead arm starts the entire pulse of the body to move so this type of exercise will carry over. From a physiological persepective, it seems that by start twelve the body is well warm, the HR has increased, along with pulse rate, and the excitation of the nervous system has reached its highest. The recovery time done in the study is a mystery as well as what was done during the recovery. We also don’t know how much faster the 12th start is compared to the rest i.e. one hundredth of a second faster compared to the 9th start. Who would want to take off a hundredth of a second by doing twelve starts when you could just do 3 with 8 mintues recovery? I know that my second start is always the fastest out of 4-6. Thats enough for me!
Charlie has mention it before, but I am not sure of the number(if it’s the 12th)
that is true but what i am asking is the “12th” start something anyone else has heard.?
You don’t have to do the entire start, just react to the gun/clap/sound.