Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Benjamin vs. Warholm, when? .... not Monaco

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rack
    replied
    The pacing on RB's race is still bugging me, I keep looking for tweaks, and I may have found something. Under 100m split times from a 400m race result on the page https://www.brianmac.co.uk/sprints/pred400.htm I found a pacing assessment calculator. I'll throw up some splits I plugged in for RB and see how they evaluate.
    Code:
    50 - 100 - 150 - 200  - 250 - 300 - 350 -  400
    6.33 11.60 17.10 22.76  28.43 34.43 40.63  46.83
    6.4  11.5  16.8  22.3   28.1  34.1  40.2   46.78
    6.1  11.2  16.4  21.8   27.5  33.7  40.1   46.70
    
         11.59       22.69(11.10) 34.29(11.60) 46.58(12.29)
    This seems to check all the boxes. 100-200 faster than 0-100, 300-400 0.7 seconds slower than 0-100, 200-300 0.5 seconds slower than 100-200, 1.2 second differential between first and second halves. It seems possible. The first half, all of the marks can be hit by just running the Trials race with a faster reaction time out of the blocks. The faster RB starts, the easier the cruise to 100m is. A good start and a tiny bit more pace gets RB to 200m a tenth quicker than at the Trials. Then it starts to hurt, need a few hundredths more from 200m to 300m, and another tenth from 300 to the line, but it seems doable.

    Someone else can try to tweak KW's splits, don't even know where to start!

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post

    Especially because you have to do more than stay on your feet. What are splits on some of the faster 400s? In Rio WVN clearly had a better second half than his competitors.
    wvn splits in WR

    (10.7, 9.8 [20.5], 10.5 [31.0], 12.0)
    (20.5/22.5)

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    As in the 800, where a 2-sec positive split has been seen as ideal, even splits do the trick just fine too and are often better. Negative splits, while viable, don't seem the most efficient. Even splits in the 400H would also be efficient if that's what you train for. 23.3 out and in is something that both KW and RB can do.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Originally posted by Powell View Post

    That doesn't really seem optimal. The 400 (with or without hurdles) at optimal pace is always run with significant positive splits, but in this case, the difference would be close to 2.5s. It does seem too much.
    Especially because you have to do more than stay on your feet. What are splits on some of the faster 400s? In Rio WVN clearly had a better second half than his competitors.

    Leave a comment:


  • Powell
    replied
    Originally posted by cigar95 View Post
    Warholm would be low-22s.
    That doesn't really seem optimal. The 400 (with or without hurdles) at optimal pace is always run with significant positive splits, but in this case, the difference would be close to 2.5s. It does seem too much.

    Leave a comment:


  • ZazaShoya
    replied
    Originally posted by Rack View Post
    Code:
     RT H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 Final
    0.163 5.708 9.216 12.820 16.475 *20.241 24.166 *28.271 *32.521 *36.926 41.600 46.70
    S-H1 H1-2 H2-3 H3-4 H4-5 H5-6 H6-7 H7-8 H8-9 H9-10 H10-F Final
    5.708 3.508 3.604 3.655 *3.766 *3.925 *4.105 *4.250 *4.405 *4.675 5.100 46.70
    Code:
     RT H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9 H10 Final
    0.163 5.72 9.24 12.82 16.50 *20.24 *24.16 *28.26 32.52 36.92 41.60 46.70
    S-H1 H1-2 H2-3 H3-4 H4-5 H5-6 H6-7 H7-8 H8-9 H9-10 H10-F Final
    5.72 3.52 3.58 3.68 *3.74 3.92 4.10 *4.26 4.40 4.68 5.10 46.70
    Times marked with a * have been updated.
    Made some boo-boos on the slomo at H8 and H9, don't know how that happened, fixed. Looked at some spots again, adjusted 1 frame.
    Have a hypothesis, from the slomo data, that the far-side camera in the TV feed is lagged two 25Hz frames or 0.08seconds, this would affect times at H5 H6 and H7, adjusted.
    KW went out even faster than the previous data said, if you want to entertain that thought.
    And both lines of times agree, mostly. Hooray!
    Very good job, thanks !
    Could you provide us with some hurdle clearance times ? I'd really like to see who's more efficient over the barrier, though, as said earlier, the way you land and how it affects your ability to keep going is maybe more important ...
    Regarding this matter, I find Dos Santos very impressive, always so smooth ... could he sneak under 47 this year already ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Steele
    replied
    Based on Bol's run today, and Warholm's standard practice, if you don't go out fast you won't be in the hunt the last 50 meters.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    I think that RB will not use the exact same strategy for the Games as in the Trials, the situations are different and the strategy should adjust (the most important thing for RB was not a fast time or even winning the race but to make sure that he qualified. He took it easier in the first 200 so that he was less fatigued in the second half, where he could run as a fast as he felt he safely could. KW had different objectives and it was a one-off race, albeit with less help from the weather, I think. I think RB's strategy is better for the rounds because he does not go too hard early and then can gauge what he needs to finish to get the better lanes. RB had Lane 5 (6, on the track), and with his speed being further out is a slight advantage, same as KW.

    Leave a comment:


  • proofs in the pudd'in
    replied
    Originally posted by Rack View Post
    That's a deep question! The hurdle for H5 is at 185m (35m*5 +10m if you use the virtual 0th hurdle at 45m-35m for counting), but where the foot lands, I guess I'll refer to:
    http://www.hurdlecentral.com/Docs/Hu...HTheory%20.pdf
    and Table A. I would call KW "elite" but for rounding I would call H5 at approximately 186.5m. KW's 200m split is from the race pdf, I'm not sure how they got them but I think I see little red Omega cameras dotted around the track in the footage. It seems like the scoreboard time is about 0.2 second behind (visible just before 200m in the slowmo), 21.8 seems solid to me! From the slowmo, the split looks like 21.731 depending on where you put the finish frame.
    As for RB's ~22.8 200m split, I did my best with the footage. As long as the backside camera for RB isn't lagged a couple of frames like KW's race's TV footage, should be close.
    Thanks for this paper: I thoroughly enjoyed it! Some interesting thoughts that pertain to KW and the super slow-mo video.

    "Although the trail leg may clear the hurdle in a lower plane than in the highs, it must continue driving forward and upward to allow the hurdler to return to good sprinting action."

    "Complete recovery of the trail leg, continuing the knee drive forward and upward after it passes the hurdle, ensures an active landing of the lead leg and continuation of efficient sprinting."


    KW seemed to do this particularly well if I'm understanding this.

    Also, the paper notes that hurdle clearance stride length for runners doing 13 strides between each hurdle is 3.50m/s.And this is what they consider 'elite' since it is an indicator of efficiency of hurdle clearance. KW did this very well in the video.

    KW had 20 strides to the first hurdle which the paper said was also elite (20-22) which will result in the 13 stride pattern - odd (13, 15, 17, etc.) being most desirable using the left leg as lead which is most desirable on the curve (which is why he chooses and love outside lanes). He goes out pretty fast over that first 45m and seem to hit this pattern perfectly.

    The article noted that it is quite rare for a hurdler to keep this pattern through the whole race and will eventually need to change to a greater number of strides.

    "A transition takes place when a hurdler changes down to a shorter stride length (because of fatigue) which results in one or two more steps between hurdles."

    They noted that the median value for when this takes place was the 7th hurdle and athletes with less conditioning will have to do this earlier. Given that KW does this between 9-10 (changes to 15 strides) it's quite amazing given how fast he goes out. I think he has figured his sweet spot of speed/endurance with this pattern. He is basically allowing the natural and inevitable result of slowing down and the end of the race to dictate his pattern but is able to do it farther than most (between 9 and 10). I think if his endurance can increase a little he will break his own WR this season. He just needs to not slow as much (which is not bad now) at the very end of the race where he does not have to worry about the pattern anymore (except the last hurdle). I think it is going to be hard for RB to beat him if he is on this strategy at his best. RB seems to have to shift gears in the middle to make up for the 1 sec difference and then hope to out do him in the stretch, which given the endurance of KW, might be too much particularly if KW is getting a little stronger as the season goes forward.

    KW uses what the article calls the Double Cut-down when going from 13 to 15 (and thus still using the left led leg when doing so) and notes that it has some disadvantages. But none of these disadvantages hinder KW given his approach. It is only the last hurdle and is also after a blazing-fast first half of the race (or in KW's case first 3/4ths) and thus the fatigue forces him to a double cut-down from 13 to15 anyway. It's like he gains all the advantage of the fast first part with minimal disadvantage in latter part even though he drop two strides. The paper noted that very few elites use the Double cut-down. The most valuable technique, according to the paper, is learning to alternate legs.

    The paper also noted that there should not be a differential of 5% between the first and second half of the race. In KW's case he breaks this rule also - 21.8 / 24.9 - a 46.70 should not be more than 2.335s. But KW is 3.1s. Seems to work for him.

    The more I look at this data the more I think it is KW's to lose. Just some thoughts!

    Can some of you stat and Tech nerds do a comparison of this type info and chart it for Moses, Young, KW,and RB.
    Last edited by proofs in the pudd'in; 07-04-2021, 07:16 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • steve
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    Tafny for Understatement of the Year!
    Hey! That was one hard record to break! But, yeah…I own the understatement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rack
    replied
    Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in View Post

    Question: Is H5 set right at 200m?
    That's a deep question! The hurdle for H5 is at 185m (35m*5 +10m if you use the virtual 0th hurdle at 45m-35m for counting), but where the foot lands, I guess I'll refer to:
    http://www.hurdlecentral.com/Docs/Hu...HTheory%20.pdf
    and Table A. I would call KW "elite" but for rounding I would call H5 at approximately 186.5m. KW's 200m split is from the race pdf, I'm not sure how they got them but I think I see little red Omega cameras dotted around the track in the footage. It seems like the scoreboard time is about 0.2 second behind (visible just before 200m in the slowmo), 21.8 seems solid to me! From the slowmo, the split looks like 21.731 depending on where you put the finish frame.
    As for RB's ~22.8 200m split, I did my best with the footage. As long as the backside camera for RB isn't lagged a couple of frames like KW's race's TV footage, should be close.
    Last edited by Rack; 07-04-2021, 12:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • proofs in the pudd'in
    replied
    Originally posted by cigar95 View Post

    Benjamin, yes. Warholm would be low-22s.
    👍

    Leave a comment:


  • cigar95
    replied
    Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in View Post

    Thanks! So he is hitting 200m at approx. 23s.?
    Benjamin, yes. Warholm would be low-22s.

    Leave a comment:


  • proofs in the pudd'in
    replied
    Originally posted by cigar95 View Post
    185 meters.
    They're fast, but not *that* fast.
    Thanks! So he is hitting 200m at approx. 23s.?

    Leave a comment:


  • cigar95
    replied
    Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in View Post

    Question: Is H5 set right at 200m?
    185 meters.
    They're fast, but not *that* fast.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X