PhD, Associate Professor O.M. Mirzoev¹
Decorated Trainer of the Azerbaijan Republic O.M. Mukhin^2
1Russian State University of Physical Education, Sport, Youth and Tourism (SCOLIPE), Moscow
²Fenerbahçe Sports Club, Turkish Athletics Federation, Istanbul

Keywords: 200m sprint, turn run, interval run, tactics, top speed, free/ energy conservation run, energy control.

Background. There is a wide variety of expert opinions on how the sprint stride should be controlled on distance in terms of its length/ frequency, free run (energy-conserving relaxed style) intervals, turn run techniques etc. – including all the things collectively referred to as the run tactics – that plays a special role both in the 100m and 200m sprint events. As far as a semicircle 200m stadium track is concerned with its 0-100m turn interval followed by a straight 100 to 200m interval, we would analyze herein benefits of our 200m sprint tactics model factoring in many success factors and based on our extensive theoretical and practical experiences.

Generally, the 200m sprint is ranked among the anaerobic-glycolytic sub-maximal-intensity-zone competitive events. In contrast to the 100m event (note that many athletes combine the 100m and 200m using the same ‘full-power run’ tactics fraught with specific faults and stresses in case of the 200m), the 200m sprint claims at least twice as much energy that should be prudently managed.

Objective of the study was to analyze benefits of a 200m sprint design and control model for the stadium tracks.

Results and discussion. One of the 200m sprint success tactics factors is the interval run times (speeds), and the other is the energy control geared to cut down the maximal and sub-maximal interval energy costs. The modern 200m/ 400m track events (including the relay races) with their turn intervals are highly demanding to the interval-specific run techniques and tactics. Generally the smaller is the turn radius, the slower is the run speed, and that is the reason why the turn run intervals are so difficult. For the purposes of the tactical pattern analysis, we consider hereunder a 200m track classified into a few provisional intervals with their priority energy/ speed control tactics and techniques.

0-100m turn interval

The 0-100m turn interval is the first half of the 200m sprint, with lanes 4-6 or 4-8 (in case of a 9-track) considered the most comfortable. Athletes are qualified for the lanes based on the prior qualifications and semifinal results. The side lanes 1-2 and 7-8 (9) are commonly rated inconvenient/ uncomfortable due to the extreme turn angles. As a result, the strongest athletes normally enjoy the best competitive conditions. In this situation, the semifinals are no less important than the finals as they rank the competitors on the lanes in finals. That is the reason why we recommend giving a high priority to the semifinal race tactics and techniques of the expected winners and runner-ups.

The core problem of the side lanes 8/9, despite their smooth turn, is that the athlete is ahead of the rivals and cannot see them to customize his/ her run tactics to their actions. Being in this uncomfortable position, he/ she normally has to run blindly for some time. Later on he/ she may get a chance to keep an eye on the opponents depending on the progress, but this point cannot be predicted. That is the reason why such athletes have to run hard the first half of the distance and, hence, come drained to the decisive straight run interval. One more potential negative factor of this side lane is the smooth turn with the awkward centrifugal forces that need to be coped with.

As for the first two lanes, they are considered somewhat less unfavorable than the extreme outside lane due to the turn radiuses. Athletes have to work harder in the 0-100m interval wasting more energy, with the interval perceived longer that it is. That is the reason why these lanes are commonly believed to be mentally and physically uncomfortable.

It should be noted that the World champions in the men's 200m sprint have mostly run lanes 3-5 followed by those who run lanes 3, 4 and 6. Bronze medalists have mostly run lanes 4-7. It should be noted that lane 2 runners have never won medals, and it was very seldom that lane 1/8 runners won the World Champion titles. As for the women World Champions, they are dominated by the lane 4/5 runners. Rated advantageous for them were also lanes 3/6; and the lane 3/4/5 runners often won the silver and bronze medals.

On the whole, 43 out of 48 200m men’s World Championship medalists (89.6%) have run lanes 3-6; whilst the women’s medalists were dominated by the lane 4-5 runners (50.0%) followed by the lane 3/6 runners (27.1%). It should be emphasized that only 5 out of 48 women medalists (10.41%) have run the uncomfortable lanes 8/9; and among their male peers this ratio equals only 2.08%, that means only 1 medal out of 48. On the whole, the lane 1/2 runners won only 1 and 3 medals (2.08% and 6.25% of the totals) in the men’s and women’s 200 meters, respectively.

When running the turn-to-straight transition interval, the athlete has to cope with the centrifugal force of hampering effect on the run speed – that may be countered by the relevant sprint techniques, particularly at the very start of the straight run interval.

We classified the 0-100m turn interval into the following four segments, with lane 4 taken for the case study (although it should be noted that the analyzed techniques and tactics are applicable on any lane).

Startup and speed-up segment normally taking 25-30m is recommended being run by the gradually growing strides, with the speed growing mostly due to the stride frequency stepped up. We believe, however, that it is not always beneficial to ‘patter’ (as the coaches call it) as the forced frequency is too energy-intensive, and the energy loss may be decisive in the finishing section. We recommend running the startup and speed-up segment freely, in a energy-efficient manner, with a special attention to the shoulder girdle relaxation at the top speed. The starting blocks are recommended being set at an acute angle to the inner line of the lane – although not every elite athlete does that – including W. Bolt. The blocks may be set so as to somewhat facilitate the tangent-line startup. Actually the exact position of the starting blocks is not that important for the successful start and acceleration. The above-recommended setup of the blocks is not always applicable – e.g. to lanes 1 and 2.

Straight after the startup, the runner should stick to the inner line of the lane to cut down the distance. It is known, for example, that turn run along the inner line saves around 0.5 m on the 100m distance (lane 4). When a sprinter sticks to the middle of the lane and keeps in the middle on the turn, the actual distance is known to grow by some 2 plus meters. This is the reason why the training systems should give a special attention to the turn run techniques, particularly at the precompetitive intensity-building training stages.

25-30-70-80m (45-50m long) segment includes the turn completion phases (50% of the total distance) when the athlete is recommended speeding up mostly by the stride widening action keeping a free/ relaxed run style with the top speed maintained at the inner line of the lane. The focus on the maximal possible relaxation helps keep the top speed i.e. ‘roll smoothly’ as the coaches call it.

100-200m straight interval

The 70-80–110-120m(40m long) segment  should be run with a special priority to the run technique in addition to the tactics. The athlete should keep the stride length and control the centrifugal force to smoothly enter the straight segment with a focus on the stride frequency keeping aspect. In other words, top speed in this section shall be maintained mostly by the stride frequency control efforts. It should be emphasized that the 70-80m and 110-120m section runs play a key role for the competitive performance and success in the finishing section. The controlled-frequency-building acceleration should start around the 70th meter.

The 110-120–150m (30-40m long) section is normally run in a fatigue-overcoming style with the energy mobilizing focus. We recommend paying a special attention to the shoulder girdle (to avoid the common error when the athlete lifts it up) that should be reasonably relaxed to maintain the free run style and get ready for the finishing spurt in the 150-200m section.

The 150-200m (50m long finishing spurt) section should be run at the top speed with the shoulder girdle relaxed and pushed forward 2m afar from the finishing line, with the athlete taking the standard ‘question sign’ posture for success.

On the whole, a competitive success in the modern 200m sprint heavily depends on the ability to run turns after the efficient startup and speed-up section and keep the free relaxed pace in transition from the turn to the straight segment. We recommend the sprinters being trained to run the uncomfortable lanes ‘just in case’, with the run technique excelled and rehearsed particularly in the precompetitive and competitive periods.

One of the key tests of the run tactics may be the individual best 100m run time of the season – that means that the 100m sprint may be used to rate practical fitness for a 200m event; and, therefore, it is beneficial for sprinters to compete in both events. One more fitness test implies the interval speed tests to rate the difference of the interval run time – indicative of the specific endurance particularly critical for success in the final segment of the distance. It is clear that the straight interval time shall be higher than the turn run time.

Conclusion. Our multiannual studies of the competitive performance in elite sprint sport give grounds for the following recommendations:

• Time difference between the 0-100m and 100-200m interval run times should fall within the range of 0.45-0.55s (ideally 0.60-0.70s);
• Time difference between the individual best 100m run time and 0-100m turn interval run time should fall within the range of 0.30-0.35s (come to 0.40s at most). For example, when the individual best seasonal 100m run time equals 10.35s, the 0-100m turn run time should vary within 10.65-10.70s;
• Time difference between the individual best 100m run time and 100-200m straight interval run time should fall within the range of 0.10-0.20s. For example, when the individual best 100m run time equals 10.35s, the 100-200m straight interval run time should fall within the range of 10.25-10.15s [2];
• When the above calculations are applied to rate the 200m sprinters’ competitive performance and for the training system adjustment purposes, due consideration should be given to the actual competitive pressures and fatigue (since the athletes may compete in the 100m plus 200m or 200m plus 400m events at a time), weather conditions etc. to rate the actual competitive fitness for the specific tactical model.

Competitive progress in the modern 200m sprint heavily depends on the technical mastery and tactical versatility; and it is no more reasonable to rely on the individual speed and special endurance only – all the more that they both need to be prudently managed, among other things.

References

1. Matveyev L.P. Intellectual, technical and tactical training in sports training. Athletic training basics. M.: Fizkultura i sport publ., 1977. pp. 106-139.
2. Mirzoev O.M. Improving technical, tactical skills and training process in athletics. Voronezh: Nauchnaya kniga publ., 2018. pp. 74-91.
3. Home of World Athletic. International Association of Athletic Federations [Electronic resource] Available at: http://www.iaaf.org, date of access: 17-21.06.2019

Corresponding author: prorector@mail.ru

Abstract

The article is devoted to the tactical training in 200 m running in terms of competitions held at a stadium. The distance was conditionally divided into several interconnected segments (sections). We analyzed the peculiarities of running on the studied distance segments (sections) and the sprinters’ functional state when running a curve (0-100 m) and on a straight segment (100-200 m), as well as the distribution of (applied) forces, etc. The multiannual studies of the competitive performance in elite sprint sport give grounds for the following recommendations:

• Time difference between the 0-100m and 100-200m interval run times should fall within the range of 0.45-0.55s (ideally 0.60-0.70s);
• Time difference between the individual best 100m run time and 0-100m turn interval run time should fall within the range of 0.30-0.35s (come to 0.40s at most). For example, when the individual best seasonal 100m run time equals 10.35s, the 0-100m turn run time should vary within 10.65-10.70s;
• Time difference between the individual best 100m run time and 100-200m straight interval run time should fall within the range of 0.10-0.20s. For example, when the individual best 100m run time equals 10.35s, the 100-200m straight interval run time should fall within the range of 10.25-10.15s [2];
• When the above calculations are applied to rate the 200m sprinters’ competitive performance and for the training system adjustment purposes, due consideration should be given to the actual competitive pressures and fatigue (since the athletes may compete in the 100m plus 200m or 200m plus 400m events at a time), weather conditions etc. to rate the actual competitive fitness for the specific tactical model.

Competitive progress in the modern 200m sprint heavily depends on the technical mastery and tactical versatility; and it is no more reasonable to rely on the individual speed and special endurance only – all the more that they both need to be prudently managed, among other things.