Is the 200M a "secondary event?"

secondaryevent wrote:

You always see athletes that focus the 100/200, or 200/400, but rarely just the 200M.

"Focusing on the 200M" doesn't make any sense. It exists either because it gives the 100M losers a chance to win another race, or to give the 400 runners a bit of speed work after they run their main race prior.

If you excel at the 200M but refuse to run any other race, you are wasting talent on a more significant event.

A 21.00 200M runner should be able to run either a 46.00 400M or a ~10.3x 100M

The mix of top speed and speed endurance in the 200M is a byproduct of either the 100M athlete or the 400M athlete.

It is, and always will be a secondary event.

secondaryevent wrote:

You always see athletes that focus the 100/200, or 200/400, but rarely just the 200M.

"Focusing on the 200M" doesn't make any sense. It exists either because it gives the 100M losers a chance to win another race, or to give the 400 runners a bit of speed work after they run their main race prior.

If you excel at the 200M but refuse to run any other race, you are wasting talent on a more significant event.

A 21.00 200M runner should be able to run either a 46.00 400M or a ~10.3x 100M

The mix of top speed and speed endurance in the 200M is a byproduct of either the 100M athlete or the 400M athlete.

It is, and always will be a secondary event.

secondaryevent wrote:

"Focusing on the 200M" doesn't make any sense. It exists either because it gives the 100M losers a chance to win another race, or to give the 400 runners a bit of speed work after they run their main race prior.

Like Really Bro wrote:

It's interesting to observe the fact that some people have enough cognitive ability to understand symbols, words, language, and grammar, but at the same time are so wonderfully stupid that they lack any reasoning ability whatsoever.

Scientists study people like you with a justified curiosity.

secondaryevent wrote:

I smell someone who runs a 28.x and 13.x!

secondaryevent wrote:

You always see athletes that focus the 100/200, or 200/400, but rarely just the 200M.

"Focusing on the 200M" doesn't make any sense. It exists either because it gives the 100M losers a chance to win another race, or to give the 400 runners a bit of speed work after they run their main race prior.

If you excel at the 200M but refuse to run any other race, you are wasting talent on a more significant event.

A 21.00 200M runner should be able to run either a 46.00 400M or a ~10.3x 100M

The mix of top speed and speed endurance in the 200M is a byproduct of either the 100M athlete or the 400M athlete.

It is, and always will be a secondary event.

Starr wrote:

The secondary events are:

200m

400m IH

800m

3000m Steeplechase

5000m

They should all be in the second half of the meet for people to double back from the primary events:

100m

110m HH

400m

1500m

10,000m

Starr wrote:

Haile Gebrselassie prioritized the 10 over the 5.
So did Bekele.
El G prioritized the 1500 over the 5000.
The 5000 is the middle where 1500m runners and 10k guys can face each other. It’s their secondary event.

The 200 is where 100m guys race 400m guys as their secondary event.

Top 1500 runners can win 800m championships (Ramzi).
Top 800 runners rarely compete in the 1500.
The 800 is a secondary event.

Hurdles are generally B events, but the high hurdles are the top draw of the hurdle events.

coach ewe wrote:

context of where i'm coming from

i'm a 400/800 specialist

my greatest coaching success has come with distance runners and road cyclists

i've dedicated the last 2 years of my life to retraining my nervous system, at the expense of lookin gay and autistic (depsite being neither) in order to learn how to run most effectively

that all being said: I say this with utmost sincerity, the 200 meter is literally the purest running race in all of Track & Field

the 200m is the ceiling-anchor point which all distances beyond it are determined

it is the ultimate display of one's basic speed

distance runners would be wise to pay close attention to their flying (with momentum, like a 4 x 200 relay) 200m time: it matters significantly

secondaryevent wrote:

You always see athletes that focus the 100/200, or 200/400, but rarely just the 200M.

"Focusing on the 200M" doesn't make any sense. It exists either because it gives the 100M losers a chance to win another race, or to give the 400 runners a bit of speed work after they run their main race prior.

If you excel at the 200M but refuse to run any other race, you are wasting talent on a more significant event.

A 21.00 200M runner should be able to run either a 46.00 400M or a ~10.3x 100M

The mix of top speed and speed endurance in the 200M is a byproduct of either the 100M athlete or the 400M athlete.

It is, and always will be a secondary event.