# How far do we get for our 7.5

I have created some charts to analyse energy systems, acceleration, speed and speed endurance.

The first shows Inger Miller at her prime versus a national level Australian female sprinter v a national level Australian female under 20.

The second chart (in the post below) shows the same performance from Inger v Maurice Greene and for comparison Jason Gardiner in the Seville 99 final.

The solid lines represent speed in m/s.

The thin lines indicate the progressive splits over 100m at 10m intervals.

The drop lines indicate the distance covered when the athlete switches from Alactic anaerobic energy system to lactic anaerobic.

Ben’s start style would impact frequency, as he was forced to get his feet down quickly to save himself and he was on his third step by the time everyone else was on their second. The degree to which this is so can be calculated by deviding his stride frequency by 46.5 and multiplying by 45.5- to remove the extra step from the equation. I think anyway- I’m no math genius!

PJ, Stride Frequency and/or Stride Length would be a very nice addition to this graph. Do you have this data for the composite 10.78 woman?

BTW, your English is very clear to me and I completely agree with your comment.

Originally posted by dcw23
Thanks pj, great data.

I don’t know whether anyone aside from PJ and CF are interested in this but I am finding it all fascinating so I thought I may as well share my latest graph.

What I have done this time is used PJ’s composite 10.78 girl, made my own composite 11.65 girl from Aussie 100m national final data and compared to the existing composite French national 10.52 guy.

What I have noticed this time is that we have backed up the Chucksters assertion that the more developed athlete can indeed expand their 7.5.

The most advanced athlete in this graph is the female 10.7 composite. She drops off at roughly 8 seconds.

The male drops off around 7.7 seconds.

The 11.65 composite girl drops off just before 7.5 seconds.

Even allowing for the fact that the graph shows 10m trends, this information can be seen pretty clearly

Your graphs are very interesting, and i hope everyone can take benefits of it.

You’re asking for more spits for shorter intervals than 10m, the problem is that the result would still be innacurate unless we found 0.001 accuracy. I have never seen it so far. I have 5m per 5m split times from Soviet analysis, but as Carlo Vittori stated, it leads to too strong variations as the times are rounded-up to 0.01, and trunc/shoulders (the point where the times are taken) variations during stides makes problems. (I don’t know if what i wrote in English is clear…!)

To compare male and female sprinters, i have some data for the same maximum speed, from my study of Top4 at World Championships 1983 (Göhr, Koch, Williams and Ottey), and from “Adrian FACCIONI Relationships between selected speed strength performance tests and temporal variables of maximal running velocity
Thesis - Masters in Applied Science”, who used 7 Australian male sprinters for sprint tests.

female / male
Maximum Speed (m/s) 10.45 / 10.46
Body Height (m) 1.68 / 1.80
Stride Length (m) 2.18 / 2.28
Stride Frequency (HZ) 4.81 / 4.60
Ground Contact Time (s) 0.088 / 0.095

Of course, the conditions were not the same, but we can still compare those 2 groups of performances, and this comparaison shows big differences for the same velocities for internal basic kinematic data, a thing your graphs don’t show.

Actually DCW wasn’t there.

Depends on two factors:
1: The best time. (generally 10.30 or lower)
2: The rate of improvement
An athlete with huge potential and a rapidly dropping time might switch the training over at a later stage (lower time).

I’m glad this topic came up. DCW & Charlie I know you remember cuz you 2 were the main ones involved in the discussion.(Treble) The only difference between the two topics was that I said 6 sec instead of 7.5 And I didn’t have the fancy graphs and stuff. Fat Cats like DCW can do that.

Just a thought.
Is it really 7.5 seconds or is that time a result of the momemtum. Cuz I think that acceleration stops after 6 sec. Is 7.5 just the point at which the person starts losing momentum. Charlie this is why I asked you, did you think Montgomery could actually accelerate out to 70m. I asked because you posted a projected 100m record, and all the splits. And you posted .82 for 70m. Lets say a person has the power to actually still be acclerating up tp 70m. :o Or lets say that they can cover 70m in 6 sec. :borg: What would they run in the 60m or 100m? Is it even possible?

Originally posted by Charlie Francis
The third question should be-- How much?
The percentage of overall volume spent training lactic speed will drop as performance in the 100m rises to the top levels.

Charlie, when does this become an issue, “top level” would be considered what, 10.20, 10.10 ,sub 10.00?

Charlie,
I did read that study a few years back and found it interesting. With regards to frequency, how much impact did Ben’s start technique have on the average stride frequency for a 100 meter race?

Thanks pj, great data.

I don’t know whether anyone aside from PJ and CF are interested in this but I am finding it all fascinating so I thought I may as well share my latest graph.

What I have done this time is used PJ’s composite 10.78 girl, made my own composite 11.65 girl from Aussie 100m national final data and compared to the existing composite French national 10.52 guy.

What I have noticed this time is that we have backed up the Chucksters assertion that the more developed athlete can indeed expand their 7.5.

The most advanced athlete in this graph is the female 10.7 composite. She drops off at roughly 8 seconds.

The male drops off around 7.7 seconds.

The 11.65 composite girl drops off just before 7.5 seconds.

Even allowing for the fact that the graph shows 10m trends, this information can be seen pretty clearly

Originally posted by dcw23
OK, lets look at segmental analysis of this comparison with reference to the primary quality utilised in each segment.

The greater strength/power of the male shows over the first 30m.

Then from 30-50m we see how strength/power is less of a factor and Inger’s better developed elastic/reactive strength allows her to out accelerate the guy for a 10m segment until they even out.

From 50-70, we now again see male biological dominance. I would hazard a guess that one factor would be the level of eccentric strength required to continue acceleration.

From 70-100 we see that Inger is a more fully developed athlete in the lactic energy zone.

Thanks for those informations. Just a thing: 10.52 performances is the average value for French finalists, not for a single sprinter.

For the women’s side, i give you split times for Elite female sprinters (average 10.78 for my tape analysis for Griffith, Jones, Arron, Ottey, Ashford, Privalova, Miller, Göhr, Devers, Torrence and Block), compared to 21 Belgian sprinters (average 12.96, source Van Coppenolle, Analysis of some stride, velocity and anthropometric characteristics of Belgian female 100m runners, The Official Report of the First IAAF Congress on Women’s Athletics, Mainz, FRG 1983 (IAAF, 1986) ).

010m 01.97 (1.97) - 02.20 (2.20)
020m 03.07 (1.10) - 03.54 (1.34)
030m 04.08 (0.99) - 04.70 (1.16)
040m 05.05 (0.97) - 05.89 (1.19)
050m 06.00 (0.95) - 07.03 (1.14)
060m 06.94 (0.94) - 08.19 (1.16)
070m 07.88 (0.94) - 09.32 (1.13)
080m 08.84 (0.96) - 10.54 (1.22)
090m 09.80 (0.96) - 11.69 (1.15)
100m 10.78 (0.98) - 12.96 (1.27)
Number of steps 48.70 (10.78), 54.5 (12.96)
Av. Stride length (m) 2.05 (10.78), 1.84 (12.96)
Av. Stride Freq. (Hz) 4.51 (10.78), 4.21 (12.96)

Some data about maximum speed for different groups:

• 4 elite female sprinters at Helsinki’83 World Championships 100m final (my analysis from 80HZ video between around 50 and 60m for Marlies Göhr, Marita Koch, Diane Williams and Merlene Ottey for 5 consecutive strides, mean 100m studied perf. 11.06),
• 6 French female sprinters with 100m average bests 11.70 (tests 5x50m, filmed at 50HZ between 40 and 50m), (source: Réga and Natta, Analyse cinétique et cinématique du départ de sprint en starting-block et de la foulée de course à vitesse maximale, 2001),
• 12 High School female sprinters (100m PB 12.8), maximum velocity during the fastest 5 consecutive strides (source John Chow, International journal of sport biomechanics USA 1987

Maximum Speed (m/s) 10.45 - 9.07 - 8.20
Body Height (m) 1.68 - 1.70 - 1.67
Stride Length (m) 2.18 - 2.04 - 2.00
Stride Frequency (HZ) 4.81 - 4.45 - 4.11
Ground Contact Time (s) 0.088 - 0.097 - 0.114

Originally posted by snelkrachtInger’s data may be suspect; published 10m splits for elite athletes sometimes show anomalies that leave me scratching my head. Such as, for instance, Flo-Jo’s 10.49 run: 20-30m in 0.99, 30-40m in 0.92, 40m-50m in 0.98 ---- ???

I also find it hard to believe that elite female sprinters are more efficient in the lactic energy zone than males, given their almost universally poor 200m times compared to males of the same speed.

Those Flo-Jo splits are fantasy: 20-30m in 0.99 is possible, but 30-40m in 0.92 is highly suspect, and 40-50m in 0.98 is unlikly, as looking at the race, it’s precisely the section where Flo-Jo left Gail Devers and Diane Williams.

On the other hand, we have the source for Inger Miller’s 100m split times, and i’ve checked them without finding doubtful results.

That’s the article. Worth a read if I do say so myself. Some important points to remember.

Originally posted by Charlie Francis
The stride length vs stride frequency debate is complicated. I’ll try to get the Ben analysis posted here from the Q and A section of the old forum. In the meantime you can check it out there.

Hey Charlie, I think you are referring to an old T-mag article:

http://t-mag.com/html/body_142htt.html

under “Stride Frequency and the Secret to Greater Speed”

The stride length vs stride frequency debate is complicated. I’ll try to get the Ben analysis posted here from the Q and A section of the old forum. In the meantime you can check it out there.

To extend the alactic phase I would have thought that training in alactic phase is required. This will increase the free ATP pool, and Cr - PCr cycling. Resistance training in the alactic phase also increases the contractile proteins so that we are further down the track before lactic begins.

However, I have read that lactic training increases the free ATP pool more than alactic training, as well as speeding lactic clearance and buffering. Therefore, should we train in the lactic as well as alactic phase to increase the alactic phase?

Charlie,
If the study pierrejean mentions is the one I think it is, I’ve been meaning to bring this one up. The conclusion was that elites and sub-elites have similar stride frequency values, but when it comes to stride length, the elites clearly separate themselves from the sub-elites.
Is this bogus work or do we need to re-think the “stride frequency is king” mentality? Generally speaking, would it be fair to say that stride frequency IS what differentiates a sprinter from the general public, but within the sprint population, stride length(at similar frequencies) is more of a determining factor?

Do women need to do more lactic training? Generally yes.
Do top men need to do shorter, more intense Lactic training? Yes and no. I’m not trying to be a wise guy, but, while the idea makes great sense, the question has to address the individual CNS tolerances and how a higher intensity of lactate work will impact on the more critical alactic work. So, if tolerable without a negative impact on alactic speed work- yes. (This would work best with a short to long program).
The third question should be-- How much?
The percentage of overall volume spent training lactic speed will drop as performance in the 100m rises to the top levels.
Brilliant graphs, by the way!

Originally posted by dcw23
I have created some charts to analyse energy systems, acceleration, speed and speed endurance.

The drop lines indicate the distance covered when the athlete switches from Alactic anaerobic energy system to lactic anaerobic.

dcw23, how do you determine the point where you draw that drop line?

Can you post 10m split times for Aussie female sprinters?

Originally posted by dcw23
I would also really like to get some accurate date of national level and junior national level men and see what the tail off is like with them.

I give you the link for a French study about the difference in 100m speed curves between 3 groups of performers (mean 9.96, 10.18 and 10.52).

http://www.aefathle.org/pdf/153_17.pdf