Eli5 why do 4x400m sprinting teams always puts their fastest runner as the first or last runner?
In: Other
The first leg is run entirely in lanes and for most of this lap the runners will be separated by the stagger so there aren’t interactions between athletes. The second leg runs 100m in lanes then breaks for the inside – this means there’s an advantage to being clear of the other athletes at 100m into leg 2, which is mostly a factor of whatever leg 1 did. Otherwise it’s possible for a faster runner to get boxed in and end up having to expend energy getting around other runners, while a slower runner will force others to go around. The next important point is at 200m in leg 2 – the order here is the order that the leg 3 runners line up on the track. Again, this is mostly a factor of the first runner’s performance (they did 400m, leg 2 has only done 200m). There’s an advantage to being in front at the exchange because it’s easier just to run straight down the inside of the track than to look out for someone standing in the middle of the finish line. Sometimes runners miss the exchange or have to go out of their way.
By leg 4, the field has usually stretched out so overtaking isn’t as hard and you’re unlikely to be boxed in. Psychologically, it’s easier to have a faster runner chasing down the others and/or able to extend the lead at this point. If you put the fastest runner on leg 3 and they’re in the lead, they won’t have the same target to aim for – they could finish that leg first, but you never know if they’d have found something else if they’d been up against the other faster runners in the last leg.
If you’re in the second or third runner you’ll have two transition points where you have to pass the baton. You aren’t at 100% for both the start and the end of your 100m sprint. But if you’re the first or last runner you only have one transition.
This translates to a longer segment of the race being ran at 100% for the first and last runners.
A team with their best runners running with less transitions will be faster because those faster runners can be utilized to their strength – running fast.
Extra energy is required overtaking people as you have to get in an outer lane which means you run further so it is best to get a lead and hang on to it. However 400m is also an endurance race and people under pressure can start off too quickly so a fast runner at the end can pick off those who are faltering towards the finish.
If you have your fastest runner as the anchor (last) runner, your 3rd runner may be more motivated to push themself when behind another team’s 3rd runner, because of the belief that the anchor is fast enough to win the relay if not too far behind.
On the negative side, it is probably most demoralizing to have the lead for your last runner, but then lose the race, so to prevent that from happening you definitely don’t have your slowest be the anchor.
I always thought it was 1 of 2 reasons and depends who your against. If you put your fastest runner for the first leg the idea is to give the rest of the team that headstart so to speak with that fastest runner getting to the second leg runner fastest. But also you can have your fastest runner on the last leg to finish the race quicker to catch up or see off the last opponents in that final leg.
You can arrange the baton handoffs so the first and fourth legs each run slightly farther than the middle ones. So you shave some time off there.
Also, psychologically, you want to be first fatter the first leg, and have your best runner list in case they need to chase down the leader or hold off second place.
Latest Answers