400 Meter Training

[Guest guest]

Mel and Members:

A few years ago I had the good fortune to coach a young man who won the 400

meter dash all for years of his prep career. As a result, many coaches

became interested in the Lisle 400 training program. It was rather amusing,

because such interest seemed to suggest that this young man's successes

automatically meant I had some special formula for success that would

guarantee improvement.

It is typical of track, at least at my level, that coaches are often presumed

to have some " secret " training insights if they happen to be training a state

caliber or even national class athlete in a particular event.

Well, I don't think I have a " secret formula, " and I certainly never deserved

that short lived guru status, but at the time it did give me a chance to

share a few insights that I still believe might be helpful. Here goes:

Historical Approach to the 400 Meter Dash

Many long sprint coaches have either heard about or believed in a philosophy

similar to this one:

The 400 should be broken into four segments, 100 meters each. Each 100

meters is run a certain way, especially the first three. I tell runners to

run the first three my way and the last 100 their own way.

I have them run the first 100 very fast. They learn to come off the

first curve as relaxed as they can, and they run the backstretch without

slowing down, yet without using up too much energy.

The key is the third 100. This is where too many people slow down.

Drill into your runners that, when they hit that second curve, they must

start to work again. Everybody seems to think this is the place to slow down,

so they will have power to come off that last curve and kick the straightaway.

Well, there isn't anybody that is going to kick in on the last

straightaway, because fatigue is setting in. Teach your 400 athletes to run

that second curve hard. This is not easy to teach. Work on this all year

long, on relaxing in that second curve and in that second curve running it

fast.

For well over twenty five years, many track coaches have agreed with this

assessment of the 400 meter dash. If we asked coaches today what they observe

when high school athletes run this event, they will note a clear slowing down

at the 200 meter mark. As a result, they will tell their athletes to run

" fast but relaxed " through the curve, and they will also say something about

maintaining form in the final 100 meters.

However, I've always questioned conventional thinking regarding this event:

Are segments of the 400 run differently by choice or physiology?

If slowing down is more physiological than volitional, what do we accomplish

by merely advising athletes to " run the backstretch without slowing down. "

Rapid deceleration is the result of a physiological change that cannot be

corrected by merely advising the runner to demonstrate a different behavior

in that segment of the race.

Here is the way I've tried to maximize potential for athletes in this event.

I believe that success in coaching athletes in the 400 meter dash involves

three components. Coaches must:

1) Understand the physiology of the event

2) Develop a personal " overarching " philosophy based upon this understanding

3) Construct a training program based on these physiological principles as

they relate to their overall philosophy.

4) Assess the training data and race performances to determine the potential

to achieve both short term and long term objectives

It is important to note that the different approaches of highly successful

coaches like Charlie Francis and Clyde Hart are the result of different

overarching philosophies. Such philosophies will reflect their training

backgrounds, as well as their personal competitive insights and instincts.

With this said, here is a brief discussion of each of the elements, based

upon my own interpretation or " feel " for the event:

Physiology of the Event

For prep coaches like myself, this may be the most neglected aspect of

coaching, primarily because authors of track manuals and books, at least the

ones I read years ago, did not present research-based criteria for their

recommended workouts. I often referred to these as " workouts for the sake of

a workout. " Here's a quick overview of what happens to leg muscles during a

high speed run of 400 meters.

If the 400 meter race were segmented into equal parts, as some coaches

believe it should, we would find that, contrary to belief, it is the second

part, the second 100 meters, which is almost always the fastest. Research

done back in 1992 confirmed that athletes capable of running from 50.5 to

47.5 cruise along at an average speed of 8.06 meters per second during the

first 100 meters, and increase their effort to 8.3 meters per second in the

second 100 meter section.

After this second 100 meter segment, running speed falls off steadily,

dropping to about 7.64 meters per second between the 200 and 300 meter mark,

before tumbling to a low of about 7.01 meters during the final 100 meter

segment. This final 100 meters is a whopping ten percent below the overall

average 400 meter tempo, and 16 percent under the high speed reached between

the 100 and 200 meter points. No wonder part of the classic strategy involved

telling athletes to run the final segment their own way!

Everyone talks about doing multiple repeats to build up a tolerance to lactic

acid, but the research raises some serious questions about the effectiveness

of such training. Blood lactate levels are certainly elevated following a

400 meter run, but they actually get even higher about six minutes after

athletes have finished their race. If an athlete tests at 11 millimoles per

liter of acid build-up after his 400, in another six minutes that level will

shoot up to as much as 15 millimoles. There is a logical explanation for

this increase. Leg muscles are continuing to push excess lactate into the

blood, and as the blood flow to the liver diminishes, lactate removal is

slowed. Owen Andersen did quite a bit of work on this subject several years

back.

Another fascinating observation is that blood lactate accumulates the highest

between the 100 and 300 meter marks of the 400, then actually declines during

the last 100 meters, only to rise again during recovery. Researchers believe

that the rate at which blood lactate increases reaches its highest level

after about 27 seconds of running--or for most typical prep athletes right

about the 200 meter mark. This explains why so many of my high school

colleagues refer to sprinters as " hitting a wall " at the start of the curve.

What goes on inside the muscle is also fascinating. In the 400 meter dash,

creatine phosphate, a high energy compound which furnishes a great deal of

high octane energy needed in this event, drops by as much as 50% after the

first 100 meters of the race. Creatine phosphate continues to decline during

the final 300 meters. Most importantly, it takes eight minutes of recovery

before creatine levels return to normal.

Overarching Philosophy

These are some of my fundamental beliefs:

Even for distances from 1500 meters all the way to the marathon, fast race

times result from high running speeds. This is not really profound, but as

the distance goes up, its importance seems to diminish. I believe that the

higher the maximal running speed, the faster an athlete will be able to run

any particular race. Research supports this. , for example, noted

that maximal running velocity may be a better predictor of performance than

either V02 max or running economy!

If we improve 100 and 200 meter dash performances, 400 meter dash projections

will require a lower percentage of an athlete's maximum running speed. This

is also very important. The young man who won four successive state titles

in the 400 for Lisle also ran the 200 in 21.7. For him, a race speed of 24

seconds per 200 seemed tolerable because it was well within his speed

reserve. Quite simply, as an athlete's speed increases, 200 paces will seem

easier. For example, when this same young man was a sophomore, I doubled him

in the 800-400, reminiscent of the great Cuban sprinter Alberto torena,

whose effort at Montreal in '76 is still one of the greatest efforts I've

ever witnessed in track and field. My sophomore ran 1:56.79 to win the 800,

then on 19 minutes recovery took the 400 in 48.38. Because of his speed

reserve, I knew that a 1:56 would be, at best, comfortably hard for him, and

in the smaller class of our state's two-class system, a time of 1:55-1:56

could win it.

This speed component has been important for Olympians as well. Ouita of

Morocco, for example, ran repeat 200 meter intervals between 22 and 23

seconds before his world record 5K performance in '87. Illinois'

legendary Joe Newton often talked about the incredible 200 meter repeats Seb

Coe ran in " secret workouts " he did on York's track in preparation for Seoul.

Many believe that repeats of anything longer than the distance athletes are

actually running will basically make them good at running repeats, and that

these repeats will, by their very nature, be far slower than what we'd

desire them to run in competition.

Perhaps I'm more like Charlie Francis in that I believe in developing maximum

velocity over short distances, then gradually stretching out that top speed.

I do accept that speed stamina is important, but only at a given velocity.

I've found that my athletes generally find it easier to add distance at a set

speed than to step up their speed at a set distance, such as 400 meters.

With younger sprinters, the wrong kind of " endurance " work can actually

inhibit their potential.

Some believe that, since the body adapts to the work demanded of it, too many

long runs at an intermediate velocity may convert undifferentiated or

transitional muscle fibers to red or slow twitch rather than white, or fast

twitch. I think it was Loren Seagrave who once noted that working the lactate

intolerance system results in what he colorfully descibed as a poisoning of

the nervous system, and that endurance work will lock in patterns of movement

that are incorrect for the event.

We never let any runners in our program get too far away from our primary

pursuit: more speed. We don't 'build' to speed some coaches do, and I've

always kept in mind Charlie's unique insight on conventional pyramid peaking

for sprinters: If American track coaches had designed the Great Pyramid, it

would have covered 700 acres and topped off at 30 feet!

Training Implications

If coaches are going to use 400 meter repeats to improve running economy,

these recoveries need to be long--some believe as much as eight minutes.

When recoveries are shorter, the most efficient motor units, those that

enable athletes to run with the greatest economy, will not have had their

creatine phosphate levels restored, and will thus fatigue more quickly during

their next repeat. The result is that athletes will simply run repeats

progressively slower. The reduced recovery time will force the athlete to

rely on less efficient motor units in order to complete the repeat. If this

occurs, the most desirable motor units will never be trained.

This goes back to my basic philosophy: why train slow to run fast? Short

recovery intervals of 400 meters would make sense if our athletes competed in

stages. In other words, if the event called for sprinting 400 meters,

walking for a few minutes, sprinting again, then walking for another few

minutes, I suppose short recovery " run to you puke " intervals would make

sense. However, I've yet to see a race where the winner is the athlete with

the lowest total time for six to eight 400 meter efforts, yet according to

the principle of specificity, short recovery intervals basically train an

athlete for just that kind of performance. It's like what boxing analysts

used to say about Canadian legend Chuvalo: if every boxing match went

50 rounds, Chuvalo would be the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world.

Unfortunately, bouts were never designed to best suit a training regimen that

was prepared to go well beyond 15 rounds.

The 400 that I need to prepare athletes to run requires a single burst of

effort on full stores of creatine phosphate. This kind of effort is

physiologically quite different from running 400 meter repeats between short

recoveries.

Coaches who still maintain that muscles need to learn to tolerate high levels

of lactic acid in order to perform better in the 400 may not realize that

lactate levels don't actually change all that much within muscles during up

to 10 minutes of recovery. In other words, current research indicates that

lactate levels three minutes after a 400, a relatively short recovery, aren't

that different from the concentration four or five minutes later. However,

creatine phosphate does recover fully after eight minutes. This means that

it makes far more sense to use longer recoveries, since this will guarantee a

complete restoring of CP levels which would be comparable to those the

athlete has at the start of a race.

How do you know if your 400 training is effective?

If your program boosts muscle levels of creatine phosphate and their ability

to use CP for powerful running, if you increase the muscles' maximal rate of

glycolysis, and if you teach muscles to tolerate upswings in acidity, you're

doing an excellent job preparing your athletes to tun the 400.

What can you do to translate these goals into actual workouts?

First, run 100 meter intervals at close to top speed. Why? CP is broken

down at the highest rate during the first 100 meters of 400 meter running.

These 100 meter intervals will stimulate muscles to create stores of CP and

use it as a powerful energy source.

Second, run 300 meter intervals at near maximum effort. Why? Lactic acid

production maximizes after 100 to 200 meters, but begins to decline after 300

meters of high speed running. Thus, 300 meter intervals done at high speed

will maximize muscles' ability to break down glucose quickly.

Third, you can run those 400's on recoveries of two to three minutes, because

they will teach muscles how to perform under high acidity and depleted CP

levels.

You might reconsider 200 meter intervals, because the research indicates they

may not be physiologically practical. Creatine phosphate levels have already

fallen dramatically after the first 100 meters, and really won't decline that

much more during the next hundred meters. Also, by running 200 meter

repeats, you're missing out on the super high rate of glycolysis which occurs

after 200 meters--between the 200 meter mark and the end of a 300 meter

interval.

I like 100 meter repeats at near max with long recoveries, 300 meter repeats

at near max with long recoveries, and short recovery 400's.

I've also become a proponent of sprint bounding exercises, which require the

athlete to optimize both the length and speed of each bound so that a

prescribed distance is covered with a minimal number of foot contacts in the

shortest possible time. Sprint bounding is a great way to enhance leg muscle

power, improve flexibility, and heighten coordination.

How do you sprint bound?

On command, an athlete sprint-bounds down the track for 30 meters. Start

timing him or her when the foot on the start line breaks contact with the

ground. Stop timing when the torso crosses the 30 meter finish line. A

second helper is responsible for counting the number of bounds it takes to

reach the finish line. This number should be rounded down to the nearest

half-bound. If I recall, some sprint bound tables appeared in an NSCA

Journal several years back. For example, if it takes an athlete 15.5 bounds

to cover 30 meters in 4.5 seconds, the rating would be 15.5 X 4.5 or 69.875.

The lower the index, the better the result.

What about other systems, such as endurance and aerobic capacity?

* For short speed endurance (6-12 seconds) you could try fly 60's, 75's, or

90's.

* For speed endurance: (12 to 16 seconds), 120's might be good

* Special Endurance: (1 to 2 minutes): I'm not a big advocate of longer repeats

If you want to develop aerobic capacity, consider multi-directional movement

patterns. In previous posts, this has often been referred to as the

continuous warm-up. However, I believe it's a workout in itself and not a

" warm-up " in the conventional sense. Some believe that a ten minute,

continuous multi-segment " workout " has benefits equivalent to a 30 minute

steady run. Another option would be to go on a ten minute run, do circuits,

then go back and do another ten minute run. Again, this is not a workout we

do, although it is recommended by many coaches.

The alactic-anaerobic or glycolytic systems can be worked by doing 10 X 40

meters with 20 seconds of recovery between each run. Allow more than five

minutes between sets, with a max of three sets. You can also do a repeats of

fly 75's. Take a ten meter fly zone, sprint 75 meters, hit the finish line,

and walk back. When performances begin to drop off, shut down the workouts.

Most sprinters can get it about 3-4 repeats tops. I've also used the 50

second run. Quite simply, the athlete runs as far as he or she can in 50

seconds. We prefer our unique 2000 meter Eight Minute Drill. Athletes run

twenty 100 meter repeats trying to drop below eight minutes for their total

time. They need to average around 24 seconds per 100. If they run faster,

they can then " recover " between repeats. In other words, if an athlete runs

a 100 in 15, he can then take about eight seconds before his next repeat. If

he doesn't rest, he must figure on running his hundreds in an average of 24

seconds. Monitor improvement throughout the season.

A great energy system workout would be what Tegen called the 90:10

dynamic run. Take a good warm-up. Run for 90 seconds at steady state pace,

then sprint for ten seconds. This kind of dynamic run should last for twelve

minutes.

What about taking all this and putting together a weekly program?

First, choose a " focus " for each day of the week. Note that I've used the

term " focus " rather than " block, " because I don't believe we can isolate and

target one specific component--and that component only--each day of the week.

Monday:

Acceleration

Active/Dynamic warm-up with drills that emphasize strength and power. Block

30's and 60's

Tuesday:

Energy Systems:

Try any of the extensive tempo workouts I mentioned above, like the 90:10 or

the ten minute run, circuit, ten minute run. You could use our Lisle Eight

Minute Drill.

These workouts allow the nervous system to " recover. "

Wednesday:

Contrast training--lots of fun stuff involving multi-plane movements,

deceleration, and re-acceleration

Thursday:

Speed Development:

Begin with 20-25 minutes of multi-plane skips, hops, etc. You could then do

your 300 repeats, or your 100 meter repeats. Remember to take longer

recoveries.

Your speed development day might also be structured this way:

Place cyclical activities in your warm-up;

Workouts involve fly-in sprints (30's-60's-75's)

Friday:

Return to an energy system workout. Your could do the 10X 40

Here is where you might do your repeat 400's with shorter recoveries

Saturday:

Sprint Bounding or hill work

Assessing the Training Data

Performance Predictions for the 400:

The following assessment has been around for years.

Take the projected time in the 400 and divide by two. That gives the average

200.

Then, take the average 200 minus 1 second to give the first 200 split.

Take the average 200 plus 1 second to give the second 200 split.

Example:

53 seconds divided by 2 = 26.5

1st 200 - 1.0 = 25.5

2nd 200 + 1.0 = 27.5

Younger athletes:

200 Personal best X 2 + (4.5-7)

Example:

26 X 2 = 52 + 4.5-7 = 56.5-59

Establish each athlete's maximum 30 and 60 fly speed

Example:

60 meters in 6.1 comes out to a maximum velocity of 10 meters per second

(60 meters divided by 6 seconds)

The fly-in 150 is the classic speed endurance assessment. Start the fly 150

with just enough fly zone to overcome inertia--about five meters. Take 150

divided by the time run; this will give you meters per second.

Next, compare the athlete's maximum velocity in meters per second to his or

her meters per second over 150. If the time for 150 meters is 20 seconds,

the " speed end " is 7.5 meters per second. For a maximum velocity of 10 meters

per second, this speed end is 75% (7.5 divided by 10)

Speed endurance should be as close to maximum velocity as possible. Most

prep athletes can run about 80% of their max velocity over 400 meters. The

top quarter milers are between 85 and 90%.

The higher the athlete's speed end, the better suited that runner will be for

the 400 meter dash. A fly 150 in 20 seconds is excellent, but remember these

efforts should be viewed in comparison to maximum velocity.

Here is another example. If an athlete run his 30 meter fly in 3.6, his

meters per second (mps) = 8.3 80% of 8.3 = 6.6 meters per second.

400 meters divided by 6.6 = 60.6--

Therefore, an athlete with 3.6 fly speed, and a speed end of 80%, should be

able to run 60.6 for the 400 meters. This same athlete will be running the

100 in the 12.4 to 12.5 range.

You can even run these 150's not just as an initial test of speed endurance,

but to assess this athlete's progress. For example, for the athlete with 3.6

fly speed, his time for 150 should be 22.7 (150 divided by 6.6) Remember,

6.6 is his 80% speed end for a max velocity of 8.3. As his meters per second

improves, so will his 400 time.

You can do this with 300's as well. Running 300's in 6.6 meters per second

would give a time of 45.5. This comes out to 15.1 per 100 meters, or 60.4

for 400. Times faster than 45.5 will indicate increases in the speed end.

You can even use these tests to assess goals. Let's say you wanted your

athlete to run the open 400 in 52.0. The meters per second needed to run

this time is 400 divided by 52, or 7.7 mps. For this athlete, 7.7 meters per

second is 93% of his maximum velocity of 8.3 meters per second. Clearly,

your athlete with 3.6 fly speed is not going to negotiate the 400 in 52 with

this speed component! To get to a 52.0, he would need to have a maximum

velocity of 9.6 meters per second. For a 9.6 meters per second maximum

velocity, this athlete needs to run his 30 fly sprints in the 3.1 to 3.2

range. This sprinter is then running in the 11.4 to 11.5 range in the 100

and between 22.9 to 23.2 in the 200. Going back to our original formula:

23.2 X 2 = 46.4 + (4.5-7). 46.4 + 5.5 = 51.9 It is always better--and

easier-- to lock in speed before speed endurance.

Here's an example of how this relates to world class performances:

In order to run 44 seconds in the 400, an athlete needs to run 9.1 meters per

second. Using 80% as the speed end, this athlete needs to be able to run a

maximum velocity of 11.4 meters per second. For 30 meters, this athlete is

running in the 2.5's. Many speed charts will note that an athlete running

2.56 to 2.59 is capable of running 10.2 to 10.3 in the 100 meters. The best

male sprinters can actually run 12 meters per second, and the best women

sprinters 11 meters per second.

On the basis of this data, what is the most effective means for improving

meters per second for the 400 meter dash?

To answer this, consider the following closing thoughts:

I believe that prep athletes can be frustrated by endless repeats designed to

build special endurance. This special endurance, the element that seems the

most sensible to work during training, may actually " lock-in " patterns you

don't want.

Further, movement patterns are dictated by what is most rehearsed. If your

athletes consistently train for this event by running longer repeats, they

will be rehearsing an ineffective sub maximal motor pattern. In my opinion,

concentrating on speed is the easiest and most sensible way to improve meters

per second.

I''ve found that many of my athletes have become pretty good 400 meter

runners often through fly-in 30 meter sprints.

As Owen once said:

" The best gains in performance will be achieved when key parts of our

training closely mimic what we do when we compete. To put it another way,

the more specific to training, the greater the impact of training on

performance. As the specificity of our training increases, the likelihood

that training induced physiological gains will actually be beneficial in

competition also increases. "

To run fast, train fast. I believe this logic should never be overlooked in

any sprint race--especially the 400.

Kindest regards,

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, Illinois

*Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if you

wish them to be published!