Let’s say you have runner X. He’s been running for a couple years, but he isn’t GREAT at one event, but is pretty solid considering he hasn’t really been trained well and obviously has potential.
Hey, we’ll use my pr’s for this kid:
11.87 - 23.91 - 54.24
Okay, now here’s a question that might start some discussion (hopefully)…would it be TOO detrimental for this kid, if he wanted to concentrate on the 400 as his main event, to take a ENTIRE season (indoor and outdoor) to work on his pure speed (100/200) with the occasional 400m race, and then the NEXT year focus on his race-specific endurance…or in other words, focused on 400m training for the entire year and probably every year after that?
Would this work? What could we expect…big things or little things?
BTW - This is a thought that crossed my mind, but no I’m not going to do it. Unless…
I would say this depends entirely on the athlete. I think it definately COULD work, and looking over more than one season is probably a good idea, especially in the 400, and especially with developing athletes. The main question the athlete would have to ask themselves is whether or not they have the PATIENCE to stick with the plan, because it wouldn’t yield results in the athlete’s focus event as quickly as other programs, but in the long run might pay off.
I’m a novice, but I can tell you that by doing almost exactly as you describe, focusing only on 30-150m, my 400 has gone 65, 62, 58, 55 sec. the last 4 times I’ve measured it over the last 6 months [and the only 4 times I’ve ever run it-the 400m is for insane people!]. My 400 improves because I’m getting faster in my 100m, I guess. As Charlie says, the greater the speed the greater the speed reserve, and this is the only explanation I can think of for what is happening here. I like Runner X’s plan for the one season experiment.
