Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: 400m testing

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Charlotte N.C.
    Posts
    2,249

    Re: 400m testing

    Sprint94, I strongly encourage you to consider reshaping how you think about preparation. Remember that preparation for competition is synonymous with inoculation for competition; which is to say that preparation/inoculation is optimized when it most effectively addresses the nature of what you'll be faced with in, in this case, sport competition.

    To leave the psychological component of competition absent until you are in a competition is to leave your preparation absent of one of the, if not the, most important aspects of preparation.

    This is in no way a suggestion for you to "psyche up" for a time trial, but rather to encourage you to think about being focused for the task at hand in training which is also what the objective should be for an actual competition.

    There is never a more accurate key performance indicator than the event itself so as soon as you depart from a 400m time trial in preparation you diminish the correlation. At the very least you'd be wise to make your preparatory time trials consistent with training runs that are already part of your S-L, L-S, or Aggregate approach. In this way, if 300m or 450m, or 500m are already a staple in your preparation than they are all much more viable means of testing outside of the 400m itself in comparison to split runs with rest intervals in between.

    There are too many liabilities associated with combining two or more repeats for the purposes of a key performance indicator.

    That's just the way it is.

  2. #12

    Re: 400m testing

    Quote Originally Posted by James Smith View Post

    At the very least you'd be wise to make your preparatory time trials consistent with training runs that are already part of your S-L, L-S, or Aggregate approach. In this way, if 300m or 450m, or 500m are already a staple in your preparation than they are all much more viable means of testing outside of the 400m itself in comparison to split runs with rest intervals in between.

    There are too many liabilities associated with combining two or more repeats for the purposes of a key performance indicator.

    That's just the way it is.
    Interesting point from James. My toughest and staple sessions are 200m intervals aka the KitKat lactate threshold sessions. Eg 5x200. Therefore, using James`s model of keeping preparatory time trials consistent to key training sessions, my 2x200 split reps are consistent with regular training - good spot there.
    I still have reservations about using reps longer then 300m for 400m race time trials - unless there is a matching TT done over a shorter distance such as 200m. Due to my belief in speed reserve.
    A secondary TT model for me is 200m race time + 4 secs which seems to work well at many levels.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Charlotte N.C.
    Posts
    2,249

    Re: 400m testing

    Quote Originally Posted by oldbloke View Post
    Interesting point from James. My toughest and staple sessions are 200m intervals aka the KitKat lactate threshold sessions. Eg 5x200. Therefore, using James`s model of keeping preparatory time trials consistent to key training sessions, my 2x200 split reps are consistent with regular training - good spot there.
    I still have reservations about using reps longer then 300m for 400m race time trials - unless there is a matching TT done over a shorter distance such as 200m. Due to my belief in speed reserve.
    A secondary TT model for me is 200m race time + 4 secs which seems to work well at many levels.
    I agree 100% with speed reserve Oldbloke. To be clear, I only presented the 450 or 500m if those were part of his training repertoire.

    We know that speed reserve is developed via gains in speed, however, training runs longer than the race distance can easily coexist in the preparation as both a special endurance stimulus and a viable time trial distance.

    As for the 200m repeats, as excellent of a training stimulus they provide, the liabilities I referred to are the discrepancies associated with "more moving parts" in comparison to a single distance/single repetition time trial. That said, if a reliable correlation is found, such as what you referenced than problem solved.

    In any case, it is important for Sprint94 to recognize the point you and I are both making in that the time trial can only be a key performance indicator if it is more than a sub-maximal effort as the greater the disparity in intensity, both by way of velocity and distance, between the time trial and the competition event the less accurate the indicator.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •