How do you run a 300m race?

Pisco Sour · 19-03-2012 4:48am #1

Have a 300m race tomorrow evening. Not terribly serious, but any race I enter I want to try run my best. Wondering what is the best way to run such a distance? Obviously with a 200m you are basically going balls out, while with a 400m you need to conserve a bit of energy during the first 200m before going balls out the final 200m. But for a 300m? Is the distance too long to just sprint flat out the whole way? Or is it too short to be conserving a bit of energy? It's a strange one.

badgerbaiter · 19-03-2012 5:04am

One foot in front of the other i belive?

Goofy · 19-03-2012 10:16am

Go off at a pace in between your 400 pace and a sprint (13 or 14s/100m) for the back straight then just go for it one you hit the bend.

Redmond101 · 19-03-2012 11:58am

Surely you would have practiced this before and not left it to the Internet to determine your pace

Pisco Sour · 19-03-2012 12:35pm

Redmond101 wrote: »

Surely you would have practiced this before and not left it to the Internet to determine your pace

I've never run a 300m race before. They are very rarely run, and never in any meaningful competition. I know how to run a 200m and a 400m race, but not entirely certain about 300.

ocnoc · 19-03-2012 1:06pm

Just hammer it and survive the last 50m

walshb · 19-03-2012 1:18pm

The way I would see it is to run it more like a 400 than a 200. 300 fairly flat out is too much. Fast 100, faster 100-200 and the final 100 the fastest.

Some say a 200 is not even flat out, but a paced sprint.

Brianderunner · 19-03-2012 3:07pm

^ It's physically impossible to sprint flat out for 200m.

I've ran one 300m race, tricky to get right. I went out a bit slow.

Remember Wariner against Hession a few years back and Bolt's WR attempt 2 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGN3knX1kSQ

aburke · 19-03-2012 3:17pm

Brianderunner wrote: »

Remember Wariner against Hession a few years back and Bolt's WR attempt 2 years ago

I spoke to Paul about that race once - he ran Warriner very close, but he reckoned the distance suited the 200m runner better.

shels4ever · 19-03-2012 3:50pm

Brianderunner wrote: »

^ It's physically impossible to sprint flat out for 200m.

I've ran one 300m race, tricky to get right. I went out a bit slow.

Remember Wariner against Hession a few years back and Bolt's WR attempt 2 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGN3knX1kSQ

I cant wait to see him run the 400m next year

thirtyfoot · 19-03-2012 3:51pm

Brianderunner wrote: »

^ It's physically impossible to sprint flat out for 200m.

Why do you say that?

If properly conditioned for a 400, you can go all out for 300.

Depends on what time you expect to run, if sub 40 you could go all out for 300.

Brianderunner · 19-03-2012 8:27pm

thirtyfoot wrote: »

Brianderunner wrote: »

^ It's physically impossible to sprint flat out for 200m.

Why do you say that?

If properly conditioned for a 400, you can go all out for 300.

Depends on what time you expect to run, if sub 40 you could go all out for 300.

A sprinter can only go flat out for about 60m before slowing down is what i meant. 100m sprinters are all deccelerating the last 20m.

Maurice Green and Ato Bolden did a good piece on it in the HSI tv programme a few years back. For a 200m they would go at 97% effort for the first 50m, go all out the next 100m then try to hold form as much as possible the last 50m as they slowed.

Rocket Science · 19-03-2012 9:21pm

If you are fairly well conditioned then go off almost flat out just holding back a small bit and you last the finish straight without tying up too much. 300m is pretty much a short sprinters event.

thehack · 19-03-2012 9:53pm

04072511 wrote: »

Have a 300m race tomorrow evening. Not terribly serious, but any race I enter I want to try run my best. Wondering what is the best way to run such a distance? Obviously with a 200m you are basically going balls out, while with a 400m you need to conserve a bit of energy during the first 200m before going balls out the final 200m. But for a 300m? Is the distance too long to just sprint flat out the whole way? Or is it too short to be conserving a bit of energy? It's a strange one.

If it's not serious and your life doesn't depend on it then why don't you just do it?
I would have thought you were the resident expert around these parts for running around tracks. Have you asked the lets run people? they might be able to help you.

RandyMann · 19-03-2012 11:12pm

Pace yourself for a low 28sec 200m and then all you have to do is run a mid 13sec 100m which is doable with the flying start you will have. Should get you in under 42secs.

Pisco Sour · 20-03-2012 11:24am

Good discussion and many interesting posts (notwithstanding the odd exception).

I ran it this evening in 42.88 hand timed (the average of 3 hand times). I definetely didnt go out hard enough in the first 200m. One of the coaches at the club said to me beforehand to run the first 200m like a 400m race and then go all out on the last 100m. He said if I try go flat out for 300m I'd tie up. I took his advice. Not saying he was wrong, I just don't think I executed the first 200m as well as I could and went too slow. Of course the standard was woeful in the race and I won by 3 seconds. Hard to run very fast in such a low key race. Not displeased with the experiment. There's a few more 300m races like this one over the next couple of months so we'll see how they go.

Hession's comment about the race suiting a 200m runner more than 400m runner is interesting. It definetely felt more like a 200m race than a 400m race. I didn't even feel terribly tired afterwards. Certainly not like how I would feel after a 400m.

thirtyfoot · 20-03-2012 12:58pm

Brianderunner wrote: »

A sprinter can only go flat out for about 60m before slowing down is what i meant. 100m sprinters are all deccelerating the last 20m.

Maurice Green and Ato Bolden did a good piece on it in the HSI tv programme a few years back. For a 200m they would go at 97% effort for the first 50m, go all out the next 100m then try to hold form as much as possible the last 50m as they slowed.

By that logic you can't sprint all out for 61m, but I know what you mean. After 60m you are still sprinting all out, just slowing down. So, in a 200, you will still be going all out for the full 20 odd seconds.

Considering the energy system you are using in the first 7 seconds of a race, why wouldn't you go balls out considering its pretty much 'free'?

Pisco Sour · 20-03-2012 1:03pm

thirtyfoot wrote: »

By that logic you can't sprint all out for 61m, but I know what you mean. After 60m you are still sprinting all out, just slowing down. So, in a 200, you will still be going all out for the full 20 odd seconds.

Considering the energy system you are using in the first 7 seconds of a race, why wouldn't you go balls out considering its pretty much 'free'?

When we are talking about going all out are we talking maximum top speed (which can only be kept up for a short period of time) or are we referring to maximum effort (something which can be done for longer)?

thirtyfoot · 20-03-2012 6:58pm

All out is max effort all the way.

walshb · 20-03-2012 7:31pm

I would say max effort all out would see your form suffer and most likely you would lose shape and time.

thirtyfoot · 20-03-2012 10:41pm

walshb wrote: »

I would say max effort all out would see your form suffer and most likely you would lose shape and time.

For 300, not the case. If you are conditioned for a 400 you could manage a 300 all out without a loss of form. Even in training there is a mountain of difference between 300m and 350m, Once you get past 325m you start entering the sprinters equivalent of the Everest Death Zone, prior to that its manageable in my opinion.

How do you run a 300m race?

Comments