How far before a marathon runner catches a sprinter?

--amadeus--

I pondered this yesterday while running, after seeing the sprint training thread...

Obviously if you take a sprint specialist and a marathon runner of similar standards and asked them to race over 100m the sprinter would win. Likewise over 200m. But I bet that if they raced over 10k the marathon runner would win.

So at what distance is the "flip" point, where you would expect the sprinter to win 9 out of 10? 5000m? 1500m?

Or put another way in a 10k race how much distance head start would the sprinter need to guarantee a win - if he ran 2k before the marathon guy started would he win? 3k? More?

(yes I'm bored, I admit it)

cfitz

I'd back the marathon runner over 800m.

shels4ever

--amadeus-- wrote: »

I pondered this yesterday while running, after seeing the sprint training thread...

Obviously if you take a sprint specialist and a marathon runner of similar standards and asked them to race over 100m the sprinter would win. Likewise over 200m. But I bet that if they raced over 10k the marathon runner would win.

So at what distance is the "flip" point, where you would expect the sprinter to win 9 out of 10? 5000m? 1500m?

Or put another way in a 10k race how much distance head start would the sprinter need to guarantee a win - if he ran 2k before the marathon guy started would he win? 3k? More?

(yes I'm bored, I admit it)

Ok stange post but i thnk i know what your getting at . I would say 800 m would been event where you can judge best. Some 800m runner my train like sprinters and other like middle distance runner .
I would think haile would take bolt to the cleaners over 800m

shels4ever

cfitz wrote: »

I'd back the marathon runner over 800m.

Beat me to that

T runner

--amadeus-- wrote: »

I pondered this yesterday while running, after seeing the sprint training thread...

Obviously if you take a sprint specialist and a marathon runner of similar standards and asked them to race over 100m the sprinter would win. Likewise over 200m. But I bet that if they raced over 10k the marathon runner would win.

So at what distance is the "flip" point, where you would expect the sprinter to win 9 out of 10? 5000m? 1500m?

Or put another way in a 10k race how much distance head start would the sprinter need to guarantee a win - if he ran 2k before the marathon guy started would he win? 3k? More?

(yes I'm bored, I admit it)

Ive considered this before in a different way. While running in dark areas Ive wondered how fast Id have to go to evade a chasing group of 4. Sinking into deeper paranoia Ive speculated that the best way for them to get me would be one goes at 100m pace the next at 400m the next at mile and the last, at 5000m pace would definately get me. I speculated though that he may be smaller than his sprinting buddies and my tactic should be to conserve as much energy after outsprinting the 3rd guy for the fight with the 4th guy...while keeping far enough ahead to have won said fight before the 3rd guy caught up....ehhm back to work.

thirtyfoot

I'd say the 800m would be the limit of the sprinters range especially if it was a 400m sprinter. A 100m sprinter may struggle above 200. As for you top marathon runner beating your top 400 runner over 800, are you having a laugh. Jeremy Wariner would run a tasty 800, sitting in and whipping the sh*te out of practically all marathon runners. This is based on his blistering speed (obviously) but also on the type of training he has done under Clyde Hart down through the years. Short recoveries, long (ish) runs etc etc.

Thats at elite level. At punter level, your average punter sprinter (like myself) would have more range and would beat your average punter marathon runner to a much higher range. I reckon I could take 90% of the muckers on here up to about 5k and that would be without trying.

So, elite up to 800m, punter up to 5k.

--amadeus--

T runner wrote: »

Ive considered this before in a different way. While running in dark areas Ive wondered how fast Id have to go to evade a chasing group of 4. Sinking into deeper paranoia Ive speculated that the best way for them to get me would be one goes at 100m pace the next at 400m the next at mile and the last, at 5000m pace would definately get me. I speculated though that he may be smaller than his sprinting buddies and my tactic should be to conserve as much energy after outsprinting the 3rd guy for the fight with the 4th guy...while keeping far enough ahead to have won said fight before the 3rd guy caught up....ehhm back to work.

:eek: and people said my post was wierd!!

I have to say I'm surprised at the 800m answers - I thought sprinters did a fair bit of endurance work and a lot of the 100 - 200m runners stepped up to 400m with a lot of success. Based on that I figured they would be dead certs over 800m. And I wouldn't count Haile as a typical marathon runner, didn't he hold the 5000m WR once?

Tingle - depends on your definition of mucker, I would have thought you'd be at the higher end. I would have thought the likes of Mick Rice and Tungska could run a pretty tasty 5k...

[edit] you did say 90% of people though, so fair point

dna_leri

There was some media speculation last year about a Bolt v's Bekele race, but over what distance. Consenus was Bolt would win over 400m, Bekele over 800m, so the closest race should be 600m. It will never happen, unless someone comes up with big bucks for an early season, maybe city-centre, live televised event type-thing..

“I think at 600m I can take him,” Bolt said. “But, at 800m, no.”

shels4ever

Tingle wrote: »

I reckon I could take 90% of the muckers on here up to about 5k and that would be without trying.

So, elite up to 800m, punter up to 5k.

Yep cant argue with most of that, I'd say it could be a good race when you think of Haile in a 10k putting in 51/2 second laps at the end of the race,not sure what he's done over 800m but would guess it would bea close race.

So next year will you put away your spiks and take us on in a few races?

cfitz

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Tingle - depends on your definition of mucker, I would have thought you'd be at the higher end.

You're right Amadeus, he's just trying to hustle you. I reckon he's closer to National level than most of the distance runner guys on here.

TFBubendorfer

--amadeus-- wrote: »

I thought sprinters did a fair bit of endurance work

I knew a sprinter who thought of running 300m as endurance work. It's all relative, I suppose.

Gringo78

T runner wrote: »

Ive considered this before in a different way. While running in dark areas Ive wondered how fast Id have to go to evade a chasing group of 4. Sinking into deeper paranoia Ive speculated that the best way for them to get me would be one goes at 100m pace the next at 400m the next at mile and the last, at 5000m pace would definately get me. I speculated though that he may be smaller than his sprinting buddies and my tactic should be to conserve as much energy after outsprinting the 3rd guy for the fight with the 4th guy...while keeping far enough ahead to have won said fight before the 3rd guy caught up....ehhm back to work.

You see thats why all good marathon training programs have a day of cross training thrown in once per week. So Martial Arts one day a week would mean you if you ever do get chased by 4 guys you just turn your training session into an interval session with 800m fast followed by 2min fight recovery taking out 1 chaser at a time. Maybe carry a beer mat with you ( I read somewhere before that there are over 50 different ways to kill a guy with a beermat ). Make sure to do an easy recovery run the next day. Also, in fights, heel strikers fare better than ball strikers.

Krusty_Clown

T runner wrote: »

Ive considered this before in a different way. While running in dark areas Ive wondered how fast Id have to go to evade a chasing group of 4. Sinking into deeper paranoia Ive speculated that the best way for them to get me would be one goes at 100m pace the next at 400m the next at mile and the last, at 5000m pace would definately get me. I speculated though that he may be smaller than his sprinting buddies and my tactic should be to conserve as much energy after outsprinting the 3rd guy for the fight with the 4th guy...while keeping far enough ahead to have won said fight before the 3rd guy caught up....ehhm back to work.

You must be doing some very long runs! Surely though, to out-sprint the guy who's running at 100m pace, you would also have to run at 100m pace, then slow to 400m pace (a gap would have opened up) and then slow to 1 mile pace and finally 5k pace. Assuming your pursuers are equally as trained (and as fast) as you are, you're going to have to work extremely hard to run a 100m race, immediately followed by a 400m race, mile and 5k (previous race distances have to be subtracted from the overall total though). Probably best to slow down once you get past the third guy, and try and recover. At least at that stage you'll only be facing only one adversary.

Can you carry weapons, and did you take the extra weight into account?

Is this why you run so fast? You're always being chased by imaginary 100m ninja sprinters?

ecoli

Interestingly i have had this same argument with my sprinter friends me being training for the half marathon for the last six months and some of them being 100, 200 and few other 400 guys of a fairly high standard. There was only one solution, a race over 800m as we all agreed that this was a fair distance as we lack speed work and they are no longer doing winter strength work.
Will be interesting to see how this goes as its in a months time. Will report back:p

Krusty_Clown

ecoli wrote: »

Interestingly i have had this same argument with my sprinter friends me being training for the half marathon for the last six months and some of them being 100, 200 and few other 400 guys of a fairly high standard. There was only one solution, a race over 800m as we all agreed that this was a fair distance as we lack speed work and they are no longer doing winter strength work.
Will be interesting to see how this goes as its in a months time. Will report back:p

Cool. are you all at a similar level at sprint distances? Also afterwards, could you have them chase you, to try and dis-prove T-runner's argument?

Pisco Sour

Marathon runner would win at 800m onwards.

Take for example Paula Radcliffe (World Class Marathon runner) at her peak, and Veronica Campbell (World Class 100/200m runner) at her peak.

Paula has a 1500m PB of 4:05 and an 800m PB of 2:05. I'd be amazed if Veronica Campbell could beat Radcliffe's 800m time. Anything over that there is absolutely no chance whatsoever. Theres just no chance at all of a sprinter running a 4:05 1500m.

I realise I've just picked 2 athletes at random (though of similar standard on the world stage) but its a good way of showing that the marathon runner would win out at most distances.

ronanmac

T runner wrote: »

Ive considered this before in a different way. While running in dark areas Ive wondered how fast Id have to go to evade a chasing group of 4. Sinking into deeper paranoia Ive speculated that the best way for them to get me would be one goes at 100m pace the next at 400m the next at mile and the last, at 5000m pace would definately get me. I speculated though that he may be smaller than his sprinting buddies and my tactic should be to conserve as much energy after outsprinting the 3rd guy for the fight with the 4th guy...while keeping far enough ahead to have won said fight before the 3rd guy caught up....ehhm back to work.

47 days into 2010, and already, I think I've found my favourite post of the year!

Peckham

McMillan Running Calculator says it's impossible for a 10 second 100 metre runner to be beaten by Haile Gebrselassie over any distance. This is because a 10 second 100 metre runner can do a marathon in 1:54.

Bolt should really try his luck in the Berlin Marathon - would be interesting to see him finish almost 10 minutes in front of Haile!

thirtyfoot

04072511 wrote: »

Marathon runner would win at 800m onwards.

Take for example Paula Radcliffe (World Class Marathon runner) at her peak, and Veronica Campbell (World Class 100/200m runner) at her peak.

Paula has a 1500m PB of 4:05 and an 800m PB of 2:05. I'd be amazed if Veronica Campbell could beat Radcliffe's 800m time. Anything over that there is absolutely no chance whatsoever. Theres just no chance at all of a sprinter running a 4:05 1500m.

I realise I've just picked 2 athletes at random (though of similar standard on the world stage) but its a good way of showing that the marathon runner would win out at most distances.

Yeah, but Veronica Campbell has an ass the size of Beyonce so she is a very bad example. We could do a sprinter (Alberto Juantorena) and marathoner (John Treacy) and see what result we get over 800. It very much depends on the type of sprinter you have. What about Marie Jose Perec vs Radcliffe? 48 sec 400, has stamina being a 53 sec 400 hurdler. She would have Radcliffe for dust in my opinion. She would also win on grace abd style stakes too.

PS: I am a fan of both Beyonce's and Veronica Campbell's ass. I love a sprinters ass I do.

Pisco Sour

Tingle wrote: »

Yeah, but Veronica Campbell has an ass the size of Beyonce so she is a very bad example. We could do a sprinter (Alberto Juantorena) and marathoner (John Treacy) and see what result we get over 800. It very much depends on the type of sprinter you have. What about Marie Jose Perec vs Radcliffe? 48 sec 400, has stamina being a 53 sec 400 hurdler. She would have Radcliffe for dust in my opinion. She would also win on grace abd style stakes too.

PS: I am a fan of both Beyonce's and Veronica Campbell's ass. I love a sprinters ass I do.

Perec is a 200/400 runner though. I thought we were comparing 100/200 runners to marathon runners?

In any case 800m is probably the cut off point.

shels4ever

Tingle wrote: »

It very much depends on the type of sprinter you have. What about Marie Jose Perec vs Radcliffe? 48 sec 400, has stamina being a 53 sec 400 hurdler. She would have Radcliffe for dust in my opinion. She would also win on grace abd style stakes too.

PS: I am a fan of both Beyonce's and Veronica Campbell's ass. I love a sprinters ass I do.

Thats why the 800m is should a gret event, as you do have sprint style training and some distance training guy coming together.

aburke

Tingle wrote: »

Thats at elite level. At punter level, your average punter sprinter (like myself) would have more range and would beat your average punter marathon runner to a much higher range. I reckon I could take 90% of the muckers on here up to about 5k and that would be without trying.

I very much doubt it Tingle.
If we were to take a marathon runner of equivalent standard to yourself [McMillian can do the guesswork for us] , and neither did any specific training, you wouldn't have a chance over 5km.
AFAIK, you're a 400m Hurdler?
Again, with a similar standard marathoner, I doubt you'd have much chance over a mile, and would certainly be beaten in a 3km race.

As McMillian suggests, if you did specific training, you'd do Ok over 5km, but not without it.
And yes - I'll have a go :-) [But I wouldn't consider myself a marathoner any more]

Tingle wrote: »

Yeah, but Veronica Campbell has an ass the size of Beyonce so she is a very bad example. We could do a sprinter (Alberto Juantorena) and marathoner (John Treacy) and see what result we get over 800. It very much depends on the type of sprinter you have. What about Marie Jose Perec vs Radcliffe? 48 sec 400, has stamina being a 53 sec 400 hurdler. She would have Radcliffe for dust in my opinion. She would also win on grace abd style stakes too.

Juantorena won an Olympic gold over 800m, so it's hardly a surprise he'd beat John Treacy over 800m.

hunnymonster

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I knew a sprinter who thought of running 300m as endurance work. It's all relative, I suppose.

lol, I was a sprinter as a teenager, I was also painfully shy. At some event or other the county team were short one for the 4x400m and I was asked to run it. I did and it almost killed me. I found the coach afterwards and effed and blinded at him (totally not me as a 16 year old). met him recently and he got such a laugh out of the idea that I'm running ultra's these days remembering the debacle after the 400.


I'm obviously even more bored than amadeus as I just did a few back-of-the-envelope calculations. took a sprinter to be anything up to 800m, fitted the world records to a 2nd order polynomial also made the assumption that the marathon runner runs a constant pace (again using WR as basis) I neglected everything else (surface, wind, fuel etc) and the tripping point was 921m.

shels4ever

So what is a sprinter ? and whatis a marathon runner;)
Haile isnt really a marathon runner he's just run a couple ofthem so far, and and has run 100s of 5/10k

smmoore79

ecoli wrote: »

Interestingly i have had this same argument with my sprinter friends me being training for the half marathon for the last six months and some of them being 100, 200 and few other 400 guys of a fairly high standard. There was only one solution, a race over 800m as we all agreed that this was a fair distance as we lack speed work and they are no longer doing winter strength work.
Will be interesting to see how this goes as its in a months time. Will report back:p

I hope someone will record this and put on you tube! Id pay good money to see this kinda clash :rolleyes:

matty_fryatt

it depends on the type of training the sprinter does i would say 400m could be it for some

thirtyfoot

aburke wrote: »

I very much doubt it Tingle.
If we were to take a marathon runner of equivalent standard to yourself [McMillian can do the guesswork for us] , and neither did any specific training, you wouldn't have a chance over 5km.
AFAIK, you're a 400m Hurdler?
Again, with a similar standard marathoner, I doubt you'd have much chance over a mile, and would certainly be beaten in a 3km race.

As McMillian suggests, if you did specific training, you'd do Ok over 5km, but not without it.
And yes - I'll have a go :-) [But I wouldn't consider myself a marathoner any more]

I am only trying to wind ye all up - the 'without even trying' comment should have been a giveaway. I'd get to about 1200m and then the oul wan choking on her 40 Rothmans a day induced phlegm would take over. My mile time would stack up though. I have a 5:11* Beer Mile time from college. I was a better drinker back then and probably same fitness. I'm not sure if McMillan does Beer Mile comparisons based on age and reduced drinking ability due to family committments, different priorities etc.

Using Juantorena as a comparison is stupid I agree but so is using Veronica Campbell based on the size of her arse. Alyson Felix would be a different kettle of fish and she is a 100m sprinter. She'd do a handy 800.

* this is a made up time

lacticsmygame

ecoli wrote: »

Interestingly i have had this same argument with my sprinter friends me being training for the half marathon for the last six months and some of them being 100, 200 and few other 400 guys of a fairly high standard. There was only one solution, a race over 800m as we all agreed that this was a fair distance as we lack speed work and they are no longer doing winter strength work.
Will be interesting to see how this goes as its in a months time. Will report back:p

The 100 guys surely haven't a hope? Generally, their training would consist mostly of max velocity and acceleration work with some endurance work which would most likely vary depending on the sprinter's inclination to run 200's where some degree of endurance is needed. I dare say a good 400 runner would take that race if it was during the winter season as much of their training during that time involves 1k's, 800's, and 600's especially and although speed work would be less than during early-mid season, a sprinter would still have a massive speed advantage compared to long distance runners, whom I presume would be concentrating on clocking miles at that stage? Come March, however, when a sprinters focus has long since shifted from "long" reps and quantity, to shorter reps and quality, and I would say that race will be very interesting.

shotgunmcos

Tingle wrote: »

Alyson Felix would be a different kettle of fish and she is a 100m sprinter. She'd do a handy 800.

She would just do, full stop! As for sprinters arses... hers gets my vote.... mmm mmm mmm

Pherekydes

Tingle wrote: »

I reckon I could take 90% of the muckers on here up to about 5k and that would be without trying.

Like versus like, Tingle. Would you take the national marathon silver medallist at 5k? I think not.

I think somewhere between 400m and 800m is the tipping point, assuming the athletes are of a similar class.

--amadeus--

hunnymonster wrote: »

I'm obviously even more bored than amadeus as I just did a few back-of-the-envelope calculations. took a sprinter to be anything up to 800m, fitted the world records to a 2nd order polynomial also made the assumption that the marathon runner runs a constant pace (again using WR as basis) I neglected everything else (surface, wind, fuel etc) and the tripping point was 921m.

by any chance?









I'm just spoofing I googled that