In racing, in a men’s 8+, the drive is approximately 0.6 seconds, and the return is about 1.0 seconds.
Those are rough estimates, but the ratio is going to be a little higher than 1.5:1, and the rate per minute is going to be somewhere between 35 and 40. The great West German crews from 1988-1991 used to go a little higher than that, but the USA in Athens (definitely) and Canada in Beijing (I believe) were back in that range.
‘Aerobic training’ is certainly not the only and perhaps not the best method to achieve the referenced adaptations.
I would agree that by rigidly and dogmatically classifying training practices as explicitly and exclusively performing specific functions and yielding specific adaptations, we close off many of our options and limit our understanding about what is really going on.
Perhaps compromise was a poor word choice, and in this context would be sub-optimal, whatever the degree. I would agree that any loss in speed ‘significant’ or not, would certainly not be optimal practice, nor would settling for such a situation. This is an excellent distinction that you make.
However, as performance is often the aggregate of many abilities, particularly the 400m, must a reduced rate of gain for any individual component in the short term be tolerated such that the summation of these components (i.e. performance) be allowed to progress over the long term?
What, if any, reduction in rate of gain, not performance level, could be considered tolerable?
Just as a teaser, in Asafa Powell’s PB 400m of 45.94 run on 28 Feb 2009 his splits, taken hand-timed by his agent at the track, were 11.65, 22.66, 34.15 which meant the last 100 was about 13.09sec.
For a guy who has run 100m in 9.72, you have to wonder whether he dipped into any energy system other than aerobic primarily for this run. Obviously he went into alactic phosphate source early and at some stage he’d have been into the glycogen but he didn’t really put on a burst until the home straight and then only for about 50 metres. So I think with respect to the original question of ratios going back 5 pages, the answer will vary according to the race strategies and the strengths brought to the race by certain individuals. A guy with supreme speed will run it one way, a guy with supreme aerobic power another I suppose.
Not sure I’m following. 45.94 - 34.15 is 11.79. I timed his last 90m as 10.7 from video, so 11.8 for the last 100m should be about right.
22.7 + 23.2??? Interesting race distribution.
You would be right. I wasn’t thinking straight. When I came up with 13sec I thought gee, that doesn’t make any sense at all but I didn’t bother checking…