excellent question and a recent post stated Joel Milburn from Aus ran a 200m PB 20 or 30 (can’t recall which) after a 400m. While not at any decent level I ran a SB 200m less than 20 mins (still breathing hard on line) after a 400m.
There is also the matter of Marita Koch running a 300m 60 or so mins prior to her 400m WR.
Does running 400m help you run a subsequent 200m and if so why? It’s a question for physiologists for sure and maybe psychologists also. I’ll try to find someone who may have done some research or at least reading on that one. Yes, it is a great question.
the question then is (regardless of why) if that happens how do you transfer that to 400m? I recall you earlier saying about how the 2nd or subsequent long hill reps were always the fastest. Perhaps we not being afraid to do longer distances in warmup closer to to the race may be something to try. Obviously trying it in training / TT is the first step.
I posted this same thing in the biomechanics thread. I figured it would get more traffic by being a new thread. But at the same time, what better place to put it than in the lactic threashold thread:cool:
Years ago I have a similar question - my 400m athlete did some excellent training, but in every race he felt ‘flat’ and could not produce the same form as in training. Charlie recommended a LONG ‘run through’ (acceleration run) just before the race. And it works. The only problem is - sometimes the athletes forget to do that … and then they experience the SAME ‘flatness’ every time! If one compares the training with competition, you will find that their 2nd or 3rd rep in training is the better one. OR in the warm up before training, they will spend time doing a few fast 80’s or 110m. EXACTLY what you are talking about!
so how long is the run through you are talking about and how long before the race?
For my 400m-athletes … anything between 110m and 150m. At the end of their warm-up and sometimes immediately when they are allowed on the track (10min or more before the race). Try it out!
Maybe we must ask Charlie for exact info. This is how I understood his explanation - and the way we are doing it practically.
ae you crazy? No lets just hazard a guess and try something in a race rather than training:rolleyes: …oops too late, already done that 
This season I have usually been running a 100m then a 400m 75 minutes later, times have been consistent (6 of 8 within .5 sec of each other) but no PB’s.
Last night I ran a 200m race as a long warmup 15 mins before 400m. Deliberately didn’t push too hard, fast relaxed, and eased up into line from about 10m out. Time was about 93- 95% of what I expect it would have been normally (best 200m conditions of the season :o) I recovered pretty quickly and felt fine for 400m (not puffing etc) last 100m felt in super slow motion but time wasn’t as bad as I thought it may have been. 99.69 of last weeks time and 98.94 of SB in mid December.
It is exactly what I meant!! You ran a 200m in a race - my athletes do a 150m as part of their warm up … with the SAME outcome!!
According to them, they don’t get the ‘flat feeling’ after 150m in the race. We do this if it is a ‘once off’ 400m race - not when there are different rounds, e.g. heat and semi-final on the same day, final the next day.
NOT SO CRAZY … !!!
I definitely think it has some merit, if nothing else it is a great workout :D. Agree no point doing it if rounds. If our meets next season are set up the same as this year
100, 60 mins
200, 15 -20 mins
400
I will do all 3 pre Christmas coming off S-L.
Anyone have experience with kids who do well at younger ages in the 400 (early HS) and struggle later on? Possibly a puberty connection?
I also noticed differences doing Gambetta leg matrix in younger vs older athletes. younger athletes don’t seem phased by it, while older athletes get crushed doing one set.
This reminds me to my 2007 workouts, f.e.:
8 x 90s @ 75%
I took like 10 minutes or more between reps, but every new rep felt easier than the previous one.
During this workout and while running at the same pace I managed f.e. 400m on the first rep, 415 on the second one, 420 on the third one and so one until 450 m for the 8 one. It was as if my endurance was greatly improved intra workout. I wasn’t even tired after this, I just wanted to continue running after more than 1:30 hours of the workout because it felt extremelly good to see that after every single rep my endurance was boosted over some meters (+/-8).
After a few weeks of doing those my endurance over the last 100m was ridiculously improved, to the point of almost not feeling the lactate shutdown of every 400 race.
what do you term younger and older? There is discussion here? about athletes competing at 400m too young (pre 16-17) and regressing over time.
I have seen kids (<12) handle lactic work no problem, such as the jump circuit, whereas 12+, they struggle. Figuring its due to the growth spurt and hormonal changes occurring, this might be cause.
In another example of a girl who ran well at age 15 in 400, running it in 60 seconds, and now looks to struggle to even come close to it one year later.
See
http://www.charliefrancis.com/community/showthread.php?t=20266
That could well be development / hormonal changes. Someone else may be able to quantify but I am sure I have read it is not uncommon for girls to stagnate and even regress slightly from 14-16. Others?
What a great source of information!
I have studied the entire thread and continue to do so but am confused about the speed component during GPP.
I saw kitkat mention:
“speed sessions usually start in earnest with 2 x 2 x 40-20-20”
and again in the sample week:
“Day 2 (Speed, maybe 3x block, stand, fly, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60m)”
but other examples never have “pure” speed in the GPP including kitkat saying:
“used the general prep to develop virtually everything EXCEPT pure speed”
and
“absolute” speed is not really being developed"
and during kitkat’s 6 week example there is no “pure speed”
I’m sure I am just missing something.
Thank you for helping me understand better!
Duwaan
hi Duwaan,
Except perhaps for the case of an athlete training on a short to long (S2L) philosophy, absolute (pure) speed values are normally not achieved during the General Preparation Phase (GPP).
Even Asafa Powell’s squad don’t try for 100% effort in GPP and most of them are training primarily for 100m.
So GPP in the Concurrent Model and certainly in most versions of a Long to Short Model (L2S) would be treating this period of training as something of an accumulation phase, a period where you may load up the volume a bit, load up the athlete a lot. But in general terms, it is a bit dangerous to try for absolute velocity development and highest volume development simultaneously. It may be possible to do without supporting means, but in any case it was a risk I for one was not willing to take - especially with a couple of world Top-8 ranked 400m performers whose livelihood depended on them earning prizemoney and sponsorship by racing fast and frequently.
We tended to use the in-season competition periods to place greater emphasis on maximum velocity development - in part via the races themselves. And during this phase it was more natural to take the type of long recoveries required for max velocity to evolve.
But, you know, there is a different program for every athlete, a different set of recovery values too.
I always encourage experimentation and competition of ideas.
If you can develop pure speed while accomplishing all the objectives of the GPP then that’s a beauty.
But the risk of injury is probably greater than my own courage to test the recovery capacity of the athletes I have worked with.
Thank you Kitkat for your thoughtful response.
I am still confused on how to utilize the following comments:
“speed sessions usually start in earnest with 2 x 2 x 40-20-20”
and again in the sample week:
“Day 2 (Speed, maybe 3x block, stand, fly, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60m)”
What intensity are these run at as they are quoted in a GPP context?
Duwaan