What this Times Means

Does anyone could please tell me what´s happen here ?
( This times, what they say…)
Which way should i take ?
( Where is my weakness and opportunitys ? )

My PB are below ( all they performed during trains ):

  • 1st number is distance
  • 2nd is my times to cover distance ( hand times measured by my self )
  • 3rd is velocity ( in meters per second )
  • 4th is % from my times versus ( over ) World Record for the distance;

Distance Time speed (m/s) % over WR
30m 4.50s 6.67m/s 18.4% ( 3.8s )
40m 5.81s 6.88m/s 25.2% ( 4.64s )
50m 6.50s 7.69m/s 16.9% ( 5.56s )
60m 7.94s 7.56m/s 24.2% ( 6.39s )
80m 10.22s 7.83m/s 27.4% ( 8.02s )
100m 12.53s 7.98m/s 28.1% ( 9.78s )
110m 14.13s 7.78m/s 31.4% ( 10.75s )
150m 19.28s 7.78m/s 30.8% ( 14.73s )
200m 27.22s 7.35m/s 40.8% ( 19.32s )

As we can see, my 40m is very poor…
My 100m average speed is better than 80m !!??
My 150m average speed is equal 110m !!??
My 150m is almost equal 80m !!??
And my 200m is just horrific.
Well, what could be a good “prescription” ?
Speed Endurance train ?
Max V train ?
Acc ?

Thank you for read my post and help.

Um…a couple of thoughts…something strange is happening between 40 and 50 metres…it only takes you 0.7 seconds to cover 10m, when world class runners do it in 0.85-0.86.

Also the way you calculated average speed by simply dividing distance of the run by the total time is not a very useful calculation really. Why not divide each 10 or 20 meter zone by the time it took to run that zone. So for example, between 60 and 80 meters (20m) you took 2.28 seconds. So your average speed over this distance is 8.77 m/s. The shorter the interval length the more accurate will be the speed. Also, since I assume you timed most of these on separate runs, that could effect the results. Maybe something went wrong on the 40 or the 50?

Your top speed seems to be around 8.8 m/s or a little higher before 60m maybe, then you maintain and drop off DRAMATICALLY after 100m (6.25 m/s), improve again on the way to 150m then drop again to 6.25 m/s again on the way to 200m. I would say the initial drop after 100m is a anomaly, a bad rep, super gust of wind.

I dunno…that’s all I can figure from that data. I think you should retest 30, 40, 50, 60 again and see what your true top speed is. Do a few of each and average the times and take lots of rest between everything so fatigue doesn’t enter into the calculations.

What’s your general fitness and strength like? For example, can you do 8 x 200m with 30s rest between reps while maintaining runs at appr. 70 percent?

Did you hand time these? Over short distances the error with hand times bites. This difference can null out your data

You’re right man. I do believe that auto timing is very very important so that you never lie to your self. And most important all, is to not let OTHERS lie to you about what you have just run. Trust me. It does happen!

The percentages climb steadily as you go farther, as you’d expect from a beginner with limited fitness. You need general conditionning first, then a move toward more specific work. As for the average speeds, they rise because you have only one start from zero- the rest you’re moving into with a flying start. (Remember the crap about Michael Johnson being faster than Donovan- all based on the average- with the second 100m segment done from a flying start.)

Exactly! Get in shape first!

Tks Jon,
well, what can i say…
My 40m time was measured a long time ago, i´m gonna retest this. I liked the idea about take 10m zone times. ( Split times right ? ).

Tks Scarface,
well, i´m training for 1 year, and i can run just 3x200m with 8 minutes rest, all 3 around my PB for this distance ( 27.22s ), this is another interest fact about my times, i can run 2 or 3 near PB for 200m but i can´t reduce times even with 1 shot.
You asked if i can run 8x200m 30s rest 70% ( 38.0s ), well, i´m not sure but i think i can´t, because, as i said, i can run few reps around 90% but with much more than 30s rest…I´ll try do this some day, ok.

Tks QDark and Fast 11.12,
i took this times myself ( hand time ), but i do this a little different from usual,
i try to start run while i´m pressing clock button, so, i guess i´m wasting some decimal seconds here.

Tks Charlie,
make lot sense what you said about average speed considering starts.
So, may i say ( some kind ) that is easier run a under 15.0s-150m than run aunder 10.0s-100m ?
Exist any way ( ideas ) about how to measure “instant” velocity (between 40-50m / 40-60m for ex.) without electronic equipment ?

Tks for all,

Well, The first and easier way would be to place cones at 40m, 50m and 60m. Start running and let someone time your splits between these cones. Lets say you ran 1.05 between 40m and 50m and 1.07 between 50m and 60m.
Then you know speed = Distance/Time. So 10m/1.05 = 9.52m/s and between 50 and 60 would give 9.35m/s. So you’ve got your speed. The problem is that it will be highly inaccurate. But still its a referance that you can use for now.

The other way would be placing the cones. Brining your video Camera. And taking the shot of you running past these cones from the side. Take home the camera. Install on tape. Run the tape. When you’re at the first cone stop and adjust so that you’re just at that cone. Then start taking one frame after the other till the next cone. Most videos tick frames at a rate of 25 frames /sec. So you can count the frames between the first and the second cone. Each frame takes 0.04. So you multiply the number of frames by 0.04 and you get a time with an error of about + or - 0.02. ( Not so bad, I don’t think we’ll need high speed Camera for training!! ) And then find speed. I wish you got that. Good luck man.

Tks Fast 11.12,
i´ll try second one, video camera way.
But, how can i make sure that my camera have a 25 frames/sec rate ?

On the video Cam you have that counter that counts in seconds minutes and hours. You check the seconds Ok. Then you pause and reset that counter. start counting the frames until the seconds counter chanegs from 0 to 1. If they are 25 then each one is equivilant to 0.04. if 50 then its 0.02 if 100 then 0.01 ( Like electronic effeciency ) I know that digital cams can take 100 frames/ sec. So you can download on the computer and get the results to the closest 0.01. Wish it works with you. Take care

Flying… question how did you come up with the - % from your times versus ( over ) World Record for the distance… i was looking at the 30m times:

3.8 x 100%/ by 18.4 is 20.6 sec…

I can see where the numbers are getting large which is accurate.

I am asking because I am doing a similar study w/ elite women from the 2003 WC.


Nothing to worry about - looks very much like my numbers, when I started sprinting - except for the 50, that must be wrong. So approximately
10 1.95 (1.8 + 1.5 RT)
20 3.25 (1.3)
30 4.50 (1.25)
40 5.75 (1.25)
50 6.85 (1.10)
60 7.95 (1.10)
70 9.05 (1.10)
80 10.20 (1.15)
90 11.40 (1.15)
100 12.55 (1.15)
would make perfect sense to me…the slow 200 might be a result of lacking fittness, “bad” sprinting form resulting in/and lack of speed endurance.

Some things that helped me was: Get fit with Tempo runs several 200m. (Just follow the tips on the CF forum).

Run a few 150m concentrating on form and relaxation for a full 100m coming off the bend. With every stride tell yourself “relax, move faster, relax” until you get the feeling your body moves without your “intention”.

Get used to speed with ins-and-outs.

Than start with the usual Acceleration and Flying MaxSpeed runs (I like to do 40-70, accelerate smoothly, 30-40 speed up like hell, 40-70 relax, run tall, lift your hips as high as possible)

May sound strange, but I believe doing some hurdle training helped my flat sprints, too…

But there is loads of info to be found on the forum…

Hi Sow, make lots sense what you said…
mainly the several 200m tempo and the 150m relaxed and fast…
It´s a question of:
Get off the Clock and go ahead on tech run´s…smooth and relaxed, no matter the times ( of course not so slow ).
It´s time to some: “Mind over body” exercises…