speed, speed endurance, or endurance first?

what should one try to do first.
my old coach would always talk about speed endurance ie 350’s 500’s
being a 200m runner should i get that base first or try to get speed and then seek the endurance after the speed is there.
I was always a strong (endurance wise) runner but my foot speed leaves much to be desired.

This is the old long-to-short or short-to-long argument. Both have worked for different sprinters, but in general, I think that short-to-long is best, especially for 100m sprinters. You are a 200m runner, but even so, I would worry about getting your speed before you worry about trying to maintain it. It makes sense if you think about it. All of the work you do getting endurance and speed endurance in a long-to-short program is done at a sub-optimal speed and does not reflect the speed at which your would like to be running. If instead, you acquire the speed you need, then it is simply :slight_smile: a matter of getting the speed end to hang on to it.


I like to start the week off with true speed work.

Same here dlive.

Before we begin world class are you more of a 200/400m sprinter or 100/200m sprinter.

i guess i can be classified as a 200/400m sprinter. but hopefully i can change that some time soon. im trying to switch to being more of a 100/200 meter man. i hate running the 400… lactic acid sux!!:stuck_out_tongue:

Then that is all the more reason to work on your top speed capacity. You will need t in the 100.


Speed first and short to long.