So let me see if I get this right. Until his training has addressed his speed reserve and finishing ability (mainly the back 200m of the race), he should go out a little slower in the first 200m. Also, in practice he should be targeting under 36 seconds in the 300 if he hopes to break 50 in the 400. As far as focucing on the 400, I dont think thats what he intends to have as his sole focus. He’s still a damn good 200m runner, and he anchors our 4x1 team as well, so developing speed still plays a major role in his training. Thanks for the advice PJ.
Mister C, yes you get my point. But i’m not in favour of 400m training unless puberty is completed, it has been discussed earlier in this topic (where, i do not know!). Kitkat is the 400m specialist and can give us more feeds about teens long sprint training.
MrC, PJ,
The target times in PJ’s graph are very accurate. I would say the ability to run a fast 300 is extremely important, but the ability to arrive at 300 feeling fresh is even more important.
That can be accomplished through economies of movement (biomechanical efficiency) and energy conservation (by relaxing shoulder, neck muscles; smooth transition phases from acceleration into upright running, from entry into and exit out of the bends).
But there is no easy way to train for a fast 400m, nor to race one.
There are just more painful ways if you get it wrong, or if you are not appropriately prepared.
It does take time. There are no shortcuts, no magic wands.
I agree completely with PJ. I don’t like kids racing 400m. It’s such a physically destructive race when performed all-out. But even more importantly PSYCHOLOGICALLY, a bad experience can retard or inhibit the development/progress of a potentially excellent 400m athlete.
I would work on developing speed throughout the athlete’s career, but then layer-on (little by little) the ability to tolerate high levels of lactic acid.
That might be as simple as running a fast 200 and backing up when the athlete’s pulse is down in the 120beats per minute range (preferably even lower, but not above 130b/min) and sprint 80m from a rolling start.
This could then be the basis of fitness to run a pretty good 300m.
You can construct such “broken” sets to build up tolerance over longer distances, eventually moving out to the 400m race distance and beyond.
But ultimately it will be the athlete’s ability to produce quality sets, more often than the next guy over weeks, months and seasons that will go a long way to determining how successful he/she is at 400m. That of course depends on the sprinter’s ability to recover between sessions (by using massage, jet spas, physiotherapy, nutritious foods, warmdowns).
There are many examples of training sets - as well as discussion of the technicalities of bend running (keeping the left hip high) earlier in this thread .
kk 
Kitkat, I keep hearing PJ and yourself saying how destructive early exposure to high levels of lactic training can be on a developing athlete. However, what should a young half-miler, like myself do? Should I just run the 200 or 3200, even though I’m only decent at either event?
Edit: I’m gonna cry… every time I bring this up the thread goes silent for a week 
150m 90 secs rest
4 x 40m 20 secs between 90 secs after
150m
2-3 sets
Sorry for not replying for your question, but when i don’t know, i prefer shut up and listen. Anyway, in order to stop you cry, i will give you some feeds: many publications underlines the fact that the good teenagers at distance runner won’t be the good runner at mature age.
In USSR, Olav Karikosk did very interesting studies concerning middle-distance runners;
One showed evolution of 3 groups with different training:
G1: start of specific training at age 15
G2: endurance training, muscular and speed development until age 17, then specific training
G3: idem, but start specific training at age 19.
The best results were for G3, then G2, and G1 was nearly lost.
An other study was a questionnaire for hundredth of international class middle-distance runners: 95% of them started specific training at age 19, 20% at age 17 and 5% at age 15.
Most of problems from medical studies show cardiac problems for those who trained too hard at young age.
That’s easy for a coach to have good results for self-pride fromp motivated young athletes. What is more difficult is to keep them in the sport after 20. I’m personally not in favour of World Youth Champs, what does it prove? only incredible gifted kids and overtrained kids. Only a few will translated into World class athletes. And how many will stop soon because they already are “World Champion” at age 15? How many will stop soon because broken?
Be patient and take care.
Wow, thanks for responding PJ… That’s one helluva post you made there. 
I tend to shut up when I don’t know anything either. Shuttin’ up is a great way of proving how little you don’t know 
It brings to mind Michael Granville, the American High School 800m nat recordholder. He ran 1:46 as a senior in highschool, and then barely broke as a senior in 1:50 college. He used to be my idol, I looked for him in all the 1990’s olympic teams, and he was no where to be found! I then heard about how slow he’d gotten, and I got scared that I’d peaked too soon also…
As far as this season goes, I’ve got races once a week, and so I only do one 800m specific workout per week (in addition to those races) and 5 days of recovery and general stuff inbetween those days.
So maybe all this lazieness (skipped practices, missing meets etc) I’m experiencing as a teenager will pay off 10 years down the road when I want to keep runnin, eh?
??? Interval between sets ?
How long to complete a session like this ?
Paltaq it may be that most people at CF site don’t coach anything longer than 400m, or that they are not so interested in anything longer.
Coach Luc’s ideas are good.
For my own part I don’t like taking young people into heavy lactic debt. The kind of heavy debt you get from sprinting 400m. But of course you need to develop endurance qualities. A game of soccer or basketball superimposes a lot of short (alactic) sprints and jumps over an aerobic base. It’s a great basis for some kind of endurance (wind-sprints?) which could be extended toward the 800m over time. I’m just not sure so I don’t want to offer advice/opinion.
kk
Between sets 5-8 minutes
Does not take too long to complete
You can change the distance - I had some of my 800 guys go
300 - 5 x 40 - 300
This workout is hard
And what about the heart ranges in this cases ?
Last tuesday, i did my 1st “hard” SE:
7x200m 80% - 1 minute rest, i wasn´t wearing my POLAR but i took about 170 to 180 bpm from the 6s pulsation, it´s normal ? or could be a signal of out of shape yet ?
your HR seems ok, although it’d be good to know your HRmax -otherwise what’s the point in terms of relative intensity- and HR is not the best tool to judge your recovery times or the extent of the pressure
hope it helps!
KitKat, your posts are a wonder…absolutely intriguing stuff!!!
I have a few questions for you which I would be delighted to hear the answers to.
The sample week of training you posted above, would that be described more as a “strength and endurance” week or “speed & power” week?
Over the course of a 10-month preparation would there be much of a difference from the first six-week cycle in GPP compared to the last two six-week cycles?
How far out from the major peak competition of the year would the 6x200 w/jog (2min rec) in target “come-home” speed be eliminated for unloading purposes? Also, when 6 x the target come home speed can be achieved for these 200’s off the 2min rec, how often is it used within the cycles?
Any answers to any of those questions would be insightful 
Cheers!
HiSpeedMan ,
The idea in posting was to provoke thought. Thanks for reading, sorry for the provocation.
The sample week was actually a hypothetical scenario. But it is closest to a transition block - coming out of general prep and heading into competition, or alternately coming out of a period of competition and topping up the base a little bit without risking loss of speed qualities - before re-entering a competition phase.
I would never use 6x200m in-season (except if the athlete was so superior that he/she could get away with being a bit flat and still win). This session will flatten most athletes, but it’s a good one for reasons expressed previously in this thread.
I would not use 6x200 any closer than a month before entering any competition. Instead I move forward to 2 x( 200+200m), with full recovery between sets (that’s up to 45mins if needed).
I suppose you could skip the preparatory 6x200 phase, but none of the people I’ve coached have done that and I would NOT recommend going direct to 2x(200+200). It would be too much of a burn.
By cycling in and out of speed and endurance cycles, the athletes I’ve worked with have layered on specific fitness to 400m racing conditions.
With adults I have dared to push the 6x200m pretty deep toward an Olympic/Worlds event, but not within six weeks.
The 2x200+200 is more race-specific and needs to be quarantined within the week.
That is to say, you wouldn’t do both 6x200 and 2x200+200 in the same week.
It would flatten you, take the high velocity out of your legs. So it’s one or the other in my opinion.
kk
KitKat, no need to apologise for the provocation, my comments were meant as a compliment!
Thanks for the quick reply.
Your thoughts on the use, elimination and re-introduction of the 6x200 session are very interesting as well as many other aspects of 400m training.
The concurrent approach of layering the 400m physiological qualities throughout the full training year seems like the way forward to me also. Would it be bold of me to say that this approach would probably be even more applicable to the “strength” type 400m runner (a lot of Europeans) who might find it harder/longer to develop their specific speed?
I was in attendance at a Clyde Hart seminar 18 months ago and it appears that he goes with more of a “long-to-short” type programme based more on “strength” work. I believe he recruits more the “sprinter” type 400m runner because his philosophy is that strength/lactic tolerance can be developed further over the years than speed. MJ and Wariner are definitely more the sprinter type (although Wariner appears to show more of a balance than MJ based on their fatigue indexes [I believe he could eventually run sub-43]) which is why I think this approach works/has worked for them.
Interestingly though, Hart has them do workouts very similar to the 6x200 discussed above. In pre-comp and into the competitive season one of the staple sessions is either 6x200 in 26 off 90 sec to 2mins rec or 5x200 in 25 with the same recoveries. Hart said Johnson found this very tough and he also struggled sometimes to hit the targets on his repeat 350m run (lactic tolerance) sessions - People used to always talk about Johnson’s great strength but it was obviously mainly his great speed reserve which got him to 43.18 in my opinion (I doubt BR was ever in 20.0e shape the year he ran 43.29 but I may be wrong on that).
I believe he has them do these sessions closer to the peak competitons than you would kitkat but I’m guessing they can ‘get away’ with that because they are more the “sprinter” type and can tap into their speed easier than the “strength” type runner.
On that KK, if you do not use that 6x200 session within six weeks of an Olympics or World Championships are you saying that all your running in that final six weeks would be in the 95%+ range? If not, what type of “tempo”, volume and frequency of “tempo” work would you use in that final period?
Looking forward to hearing your reply…
SM
SM,
Concerning the 6 x 200m, i think that kitkat use it very soon in the program, while for Clyde Hart, it is just a moment of his program, which starts at 16 x 200m in 36 with 2min rest, and each week a rep and a second are drop keeping the same rest, so it goes 15 x 200m in 35sec, and there will be a moment in the program where using this decay, you have 6 x 200m in 26sec and 5 x 200m in 25sec, (it occurs in May-June before US Trials) until MJ manages to do 3 reps in sub 23sec (even sub22 just before Atlanta Olympics).
From what i’ve understood, kitkat do the 6 x 200 at a higher speed than MJ does. And both Hart and Kitkat don’t do the 6 x 200 close to the season objective competition.
But i’m keenly waiting for kk’s reply on this.
On the other hand, Juantorena did a week before Montreal a 2 sets 3 x 200m in 21.5-22.5 but he was a 20.7/1:43 runner (remember that 22.0 is 96% intensity for Juanto while for MJ it is 87%, enormous difference…). So on contrary i guess Juanto can get away with that because he is an endurance-type 400m runner.
PJ,
Juanto is not “getting away” with that because for him the 2x3x200m acts more like a speed session (96%) while for MJ the 6x200 at 87% is more intensive tempo endurance (and more likely to be sapping on the legs). But like I said previously he can “get away” with this 87% endurance type session closer to Major Competitions because of his ability (in my opinion) to tap into his speed easier than others.
Also you may have misinterpreted Hart’s progression of the repeat 200 session: HE DOES NOT REDUCE THE RUNNING TIME AND REPS WEEK BY WEEK.
Yes, he may start on 16x200 in 36secs with 3mins rec (for example) in the early Fall but will stick with the same number of reps for a period of time (which could last for example 4, 6 or 8 weeks) and instead of reducing the time he will reduce the recovery. “Tightening the screws” as he liked to say
So a Hart progressions scheme could look something like this:
Week 1: 16x200 in 36 w/ 3:00 rec
Week 2:16x200 in 36 w/ 2:30 rec
Week 3:16x200 in 36 w/ 2:15 rec
Week 4:16x200 in 36 w/ 2:00 rec
Week 5:16x200 in 36 w/ 1:45 rec
Week 6:16x200 in 36 w/ 1:30 rec
Week 7: 14x200 in 34 w/3:00 rec
Week 8: 14x200 in 34 w/2:30 rec etc.
Eventually this progressed to either 6x200 in 26 w/ 90 sec rec or 5x200 in 25 w/90 sec rec over a 9/10 Month period for MJ which was used REGULARLY (not for a moment) in the pre-comp and competitive season. Hart said he didn’t really believe in fully peaking (just unloading and reloading) and insisted that by keeping up this type of work on a regular basis it meant that fast times could be re-produced over the course of a season if you pick your races carefully and are willing to train through the smaller races - looking to Wariner’s progression last year - almost a text book progression!!!
But it is still my belief, based on looking at the other components in Hart’s programme that his plan and type of work he uses will benefit more the “Sprinter Type” runner as he describes it.
Still though, I am also waiting keenly on what kitkat has to say about the questions in my previous post.
If you read my post again, you’ll see that i said that 6x200 and 5x200 occurs in May-June (that’s 2 months) and 3 x 200 just before major goal (August). So it doesn’t look at all to a week per week progression… Aslo MJ reduced rest times gradually in his career. So that’s not a tough ruled program, it takes in account the level and the current state of the athletes. Also, Hart insisted in that the last repetition are done at “free” speed.
I gave the example of Juantorena to show that there are very different types of 400m runners, and I doubt MJ could have done 2 x 3 x 200m at 96% like Juantorena did. MJ did actually half of it and at 87% speed. Juantorena was a distance type, MJ would have been burn with that kind of cession a week prior majors. (not there was no real such progression for Juanto, he did similar cessio through the year, increasing intensity, which looks like more to what kitkat does, if i’m not mistaken)
Compare to this post:
Is that a contradiction? It may be a difference in language or something but I’m not sure what you’re trying to say…what point are you trying to make here PJ? Excuse my ignorance
Also, the progression I posted was merely a hypothetical one trying to illustrate the way Hart MIGHT bring about progression with this workout, it is not a strict rule.
PJ, I never said MJ did 6x200m a week prior to a major, I also stated that there are different types of 400m runners and again it may be a language discrepancy here but what point are you trying to make?
Maybe you should read my posts again and the questions I put to KitKat to see what I am trying to say…
That´s cool man !!
But why not start at 38 for example, then, reducing about 1s each rep from 16th to 8th,
so the last eight would be around 28 ?
Is that the same thing or different kinds of train ?