I'm training to sprint faster. I ran the first 10 yards in 2.3 seconds so I think that's where I need to bank the most time. Then, correct my form. Hopefully I can get to low 5 seconds by december.
i was a distance runner and i got decent at it running a 19:30 for 5k and 5:45 mile. I'm just working on my explosiveness now, trying to be more aesthetic too.
My top speed ain't too bad atm actually, 20-21mph. It's mainly my start/form that needs work. I think after I polish this and my form I can shave off a good amount of tim.
Don’t miss out on all the action this week at DraftKings! Download the DraftKings Sportsbook app today! Sign-up using https://dkng.co/symmonds or through my ...
As a white guy who's run 4.3x and at my peak was probably capable of 4.2x (depending on timing utilized)...I just shake my head.
I'm also not reall clear what kind of insights OP is really going for or could benefit from. But the 5.8, and the "form", don't have a lot going for it outside of just trying to give generally positive feedback from a "participation trophy" POV.
Your 4.3 is probably a 5.0 by NFL standards. You have to remember that doing it on a football field on a soft surface makes it tougher to do... So if you did 4.3 on the track hand timed then that's the equivalent of around 4.8 on the track depending on how you hand timed yourself... Then add in .20 to that to make up for the softer football surface. Running on a harder track surface is always going to be faster...
Considering that I've run a 10.27 100m, no. I actually BEAT (blew away in many cases) guys on the track who eventually went to the combine and ran "official" 4.4s. I can't remember if some of those guys actually ran some 4.3s at the combine or at pro days, though. Pro-day 4.3s are akin to political autobiographies, of course.
The combine timing system is a bit of a sham, to boot. They are still starting their clocks by hand there (at least last I heard). I had seen some talk if "automating" the clock starting, too, but I bet they NEVER do it because it would turn 4.3x guys into 4.5 guys and the players and agents will never cosign on that. That hand start essentially nullifies the "turf" bologna argument, which they also likely stiffen up for the 40 tests, anyway. Practically turns it into a track in and if itself.
We've tangled before, Matt. I'm the reason you now add .80 to all your "times" now. I know a thing or two about this stuff. At the "official" combine, at my prime, I would have clocked at least mid 4.3. And I think that's being a bit conservative. I've run 4.5 (+/- .05) on the track off of a coaches eye replay when starting the clock off the SLIGHTEST first movement on slow mo. In spikes, but not from a three point stance, and without blocks. And that was in an early season test when I was training alone and in my mid thirties. So....when I was running 10.3/10.25 in my early 20s? Yes....yes I was a 4.3 guy and perhaps better. And I was a bad starter/accelerator compared to some of my peers at the time.
My point may ultimately be, a 4.3x by fast guys isn't necessarily that noteworthy. If you run 10.3/10.4 you can likely get into the 4.3s one way or another. Which, vis-a-vis renders 5.0+ results....kind of silly talk unless you're 250/300+ lbs.
13.6 and 28.2 actually (my start is not good). but i believe i have gotten faster since i improved my form and have been doing flies. will actually have to test my legs out at a meet.
Your 4.3 is probably a 5.0 by NFL standards. You have to remember that doing it on a football field on a soft surface makes it tougher to do... So if you did 4.3 on the track hand timed then that's the equivalent of around 4.8 on the track depending on how you hand timed yourself... Then add in .20 to that to make up for the softer football surface. Running on a harder track surface is always going to be faster...
Considering that I've run a 10.27 100m, no. I actually BEAT (blew away in many cases) guys on the track who eventually went to the combine and ran "official" 4.4s. I can't remember if some of those guys actually ran some 4.3s at the combine or at pro days, though. Pro-day 4.3s are akin to political autobiographies, of course.
The combine timing system is a bit of a sham, to boot. They are still starting their clocks by hand there (at least last I heard). I had seen some talk if "automating" the clock starting, too, but I bet they NEVER do it because it would turn 4.3x guys into 4.5 guys and the players and agents will never cosign on that. That hand start essentially nullifies the "turf" bologna argument, which they also likely stiffen up for the 40 tests, anyway. Practically turns it into a track in and if itself.
We've tangled before, Matt. I'm the reason you now add .80 to all your "times" now. I know a thing or two about this stuff. At the "official" combine, at my prime, I would have clocked at least mid 4.3. And I think that's being a bit conservative. I've run 4.5 (+/- .05) on the track off of a coaches eye replay when starting the clock off the SLIGHTEST first movement on slow mo. In spikes, but not from a three point stance, and without blocks. And that was in an early season test when I was training alone and in my mid thirties. So....when I was running 10.3/10.25 in my early 20s? Yes....yes I was a 4.3 guy and perhaps better. And I was a bad starter/accelerator compared to some of my peers at the time.
My point may ultimately be, a 4.3x by fast guys isn't necessarily that noteworthy. If you run 10.3/10.4 you can likely get into the 4.3s one way or another. Which, vis-a-vis renders 5.0+ results....kind of silly talk unless you're 250/300+ lbs.
TLDR warning:
If you want people to evaluate your track speed run a FAT 100 and 200 to get some benchmarks. If you are worried about speed for ball sports, go play that sport. Either you can get separation in the game or you can't.
Main Rant about 40 yd times being garbage:
For comparison, Usain Bolt went through 40 meters in 4.64 seconds in his WR 9.58.
Subtracting out. 29 secs for the 3.5 meter difference between 40 yds and 40 meters equals a 40 yd split of 4.35. However, that was his time from the gun.
Subtract out his .15 second reaction time to follow combine timing rules and you get a 4.20 second 40 yard time when measured from first movement to the 40 yard mark.
In his best races, including the WR 9.58, Bolt was in the lead by 40 yds/ meters. So in all likelihood, no one has ever run 40 yards faster than that 4.20 second mark. Maybe Coleman or somebody else ran a 4.19 or a 4.18 first 40 yard split in a 60 meter race but I wouldn't bet on it.
The very fastest NFL runners of all time are 10.00-10.20 guys not 9.6-9.8 guys like Bolt and Coleman.
Even over 40 yds, Bolt has at least a tenth over guys like Chris Johnson, Devin Hester, Trindon Holliday, etc, etc. So, I'm highly skeptical of any 40 time under 4.3 for the fastest runners and any time under 4.5 better be backed up with a sub 10.5 100 meter FAT time to mean anything.
I agree that the combine should go to laser/ camera timing for both the start and finish of the 40 yd to calibrate everything. Like the poster above said, they won't because no one wants to see the fastest time of the year at 4.41.