Strength/Mass Sprinting for Muscle Growth

[ROcknrollracing]

It has. You have outright lied or misrepresented every supposed achievement you have had in your posts.

I used to give you the benefit of the doubt in threads pre all this. Now that I went and used the search function, it's obvious you are full of shit.

There isn't even a point of wasting the time, because you have no understanding of what you are talking about, say something and when anyone doesn't immediately agree with you,you lie about something you did in the past as proof of your experience and then throw a tantrum.

Congatulations on officially becoming the worst poster in this forum.It took you a while to commit fully, but you finally managed it.

Then dont waste your time. I dont care what you do and do not wish to know anything that you have to say anyways.

 

[ROcknrollracing]

Yes, starting sprinting is more risky than most people believe. I second hill sprints for that reason, or prowlers, sleds, exergenies or long bands; they will all put your body in a position more similar to the starting position - or a hill, for that matter.
800 m not so much, that's a middle distance, not a sprint, plus it's metabolically different. A top 800 m runner will run two sub-51 s 400 m back to back, and he'll have battery acid in his legs by the time he reaches the 600 m mark. 800 m runners are typically very, very lanky, typically around 10 kg lighter than most sprinters their height.
BTW, track athletes have an ongoing internal debate whether 400 m are still a sprint or already middle distance - it has some elements of both.

I would say just sub maximal repeat sprint or sub maximal build up sprints are another way to train up to full out sprints. Nordic curls a couple of times per week wouldnt hurt either.

 

[maximus__]

Then dont waste your time. I dont care what you do and do not wish to know anything that you have to say anyways.

Then why do you tag me when I make a post to another poster... again...

 

[ROcknrollracing]

Then why do you tag me when I make a post to another poster... again...

because I wanted to

 

[maximus__]

because I wanted to

 

[ROcknrollracing]

Nah there was nothing added or taken away just because you and others wish it were so.

 

[period]

That's why I picked those distances. A non conditioned athlete won't hit a fast enough speed over that distance. I would recommend doing those 800, 600,400,200 sequentially over a couple weeks. By the time we are hitting our real sprint efforts we have a bit of conditioning and general prep at those longer paces, before we go hard.

I don't think the poster is going for world class sprint times. Just wants to use sprinting as part of their training.Most important thing is to not get injured.

Well, a non-conditioned athlete will potentially struggle to run 800 m in anything remotely resembling a sprint... even 600 and 400 will be tough. 200 is the highest I would go when working up to full sprints on the track, using a stopwatch and running them subsequently faster. That is if we're talking sprinting from start to finish. A good drill can be "U"s on a football field or similar: you start at one end, do an easy jog of the first length, then start building speed while running the narrow end in a curve and end up sprinting the second length (using the last 10-15 m to decelerate).

 

[period]

I never said you have to squat, bench or deadlift at all to be a fighter only that you train general movement patterns. Rope climbing is great.

We can agree on that. However, most people regard things like rope climbing etc. as conditioning rather than strength work, and if you're any good at it, it kind of is - an 8 m rope will typically require around 14 reaches to get up, more if you're not pulling in long strokes (a.l. half a metre per stroke). Do multiple lengths in a row and you'll be up to 40+ strokes very quickly. It's similar for many other conditioning drills, and there are many that few people outside the schools that swear by them have even seriously tried. And that goes for bodyweight stuff as well as partner drills certain forms of free weights like Indian clubs / chi ishi etc.

Other than myself the two martial artists that I posted videos in that thread one has been testing his method and theories since to early 70s. Ramsey dewey was a former MMA fighter who had to retire from getting a broken bone in his face and now teaches in china.

I know who Ramsey is, I'm always amused that he could be my brother in terms of haircut, beard styles etc. And for the most part, I think what he says makes a lot of sense.
But when it comes to testing theories in combat sports, arguably results in competition count the most, and until those are achieved on a broad basis, the argument that your approach works better than another remains theoretical.

Of course not. At the highest levels strategy of the fight comes into play even more so then. Even a certain style against another style could be one fighters advantage. Fighting is only one thing it is not a style. I hope people can understand that and it would make understanding MMA easier.

I think of combat sports in terms of rulesets, schools and personal styles. MMA is a ruleset (or multiple, somwhat similar rulesets if you will). The ruleset allows certain actions, disallows others and leaves room for creativity within those boundaries. This room is generally filled through what the school teaches and the individual adopts, typically in reaction to current trends within the sport.
I usually don't talk about fighting without a ruleset, where we can happily agree it's only one thing (complicated by the fact that people may use weapons etc.)

Not a complete beginner. A complete beginner is someone I consider that has not any GPP relevant to being an athlete at all. A less genetic specimen for a given sport could be very well be technically better than a more endowed phenotype but still lose because the genetic attributes are nearly too much to overcome. They very well could over come them on a given day because that is where upsets do happen.

Hope that makes sense.

Theoretically it's possible, but it's more likely going to happen in any type of sport where the movement patterns are relatively few, simple and therefore physical attributes count more. So it's much more likely in track and field, powerlifting and maybe boxing compared to grappling, gymnastics and Olympic lifting, where few people will peak before ten years of specific training.

 

[maximus__]

Well, a non-conditioned athlete will potentially struggle to run 800 m in anything remotely resembling a sprint... even 600 and 400 will be tough. 200 is the highest I would go when working up to full sprints on the track, using a stopwatch and running them subsequently faster. That is if we're talking sprinting from start to finish. A good drill can be "U"s on a football field or similar: you start at one end, do an easy jog of the first length, then start building speed while running the narrow end in a curve and end up sprinting the second length (using the last 10-15 m to decelerate).

It's self limiting intentionally. 1 of two things happens.
They actually try and full send 800m and can only do slower runs from there.
Or they pace themselves to run those distances and finish the end portion strong.

Just tell the athlete to run at a pace they can finish the interval without fully gassing.

By the time they work themselves to the short sprint intervals over a couple weeks, the 200s will feel easy and the 100s feel great.

People usually pace themselves more than full send it. We all like to think we work super hard and are tough, but usually we hold back a touch.

I would rather someone have a decent volume of running before they start doing anything too complicated or truly fast.

 

[period]

It's self limiting intentionally. 1 of two things happens.
They actually try and full send 800m and can only do slower runs from there.
Or they pace themselves to run those distances and finish the end portion strong.

Just tell the athlete to run at a pace they can finish the interval without fully gassing.

By the time they work themselves to the short sprint intervals over a couple weeks, the 200s will feel easy and the 100s feel great.

People usually pace themselves more than full send it. We all like to think we work super hard and are tough, but usually we hold back a touch.

I would rather someone have a decent volume of running before they start doing anything too complicated or truly fast.

Well, I ran the 800 competitively, and I remember them as brutal. While jogging 800 m is nothing, trying to run them fast is very hard, and not something we would have had any of our prospective sprinters do. They typically started their season with what my coach called "Steigerungsläufe" - starting slow and accellerating over a certain distance, ranging from 30 to 300 m (the "Us" described above).
On the other hand, my pre-season for the 800 m typically consisted of the opposite order of what you described - early in the pre-season, I would do 10x100 or 10x 200 m (faster than race speed), then maybe 5x400 m, then 2-3 x 600 m, then 1-2x 800 m.

 

[maximus__]

Well, I ran the 800 competitively, and I remember them as brutal. While jogging 800 m is nothing, trying to run them fast is very hard, and not something we would have had any of our prospective sprinters do. They typically started their season with what my coach called "Steigerungsläufe" - starting slow and accellerating over a certain distance, ranging from 30 to 300 m (the "Us" described above).
On the other hand, my pre-season for the 800 m typically consisted of the opposite order of what you described - early in the pre-season, I would do 10x100 or 10x 200 m (faster than race speed), then maybe 5x400 m, then 2-3 x 600 m, then 1-2x 800 m.

So does it make sense why we would apply pretty much the same progression to build a new sprinter to a shorter distance?

For a new person who just wants to sprint I am talking about basically breaking that down over a couple months to build the necessary volume to run hard without injury.

We are talking about the same thing, but you ran 800m. TS was talking about 100s and 60s. You needed to run an 800 metre fast. TS wants to run 60-100m. Your building the ability to maintain speed over 800m sequentially over a program so you start shorter to try and stay fast as you add distance. My version starts slower and longer but builds to going fast over a short distance.

Same goal but different ends of the spectrum. Sprinting is one of the biggest causes of injury in recreational athletes. Dad comes out and used to play football in highschool, tries to sprint again like the good old days and does a hammy. We want to build the tendons and necessary strength before we smash out 100m as hard as we can repeatedly.

 

[period]

So does it make sense why we would apply pretty much the same progression to build a new sprinter to a shorter distance?

For a new person who just wants to sprint I am talking about basically breaking that down over a couple months to build the necessary volume to run hard without injury.

We are talking about the same thing, but you ran 800m. TS was talking about 100s and 60s. You needed to run an 800 metre fast. TS wants to run 60-100m. Your building the ability to maintain speed over 800m sequentially over a program so you start shorter to try and stay fast as you add distance. My version starts slower and longer but builds to going fast over a short distance.

Same goal but different ends of the spectrum. Sprinting is one of the biggest causes of injury in recreational athletes. Dad comes out and used to play football in highschool, tries to sprint again like the good old days and does a hammy. We want to build the tendons and necessary strength before we smash out 100m as hard as we can repeatedly.

I may be wrong, but that's not how we did it, and I think it makes sense. Maybe I can put it more clearly with a comparison: let's say your goal is to introduce heavy snatches into your program; I think we can agree you will not start with your 1 RM, but you also won't start at 40 reps per set. You would start somewhere between 5 and 10, 10 already being the upper end of the spectrum, and you would accept going lighter than you could (and not chosing 40 because it would give you a better workout and more reps). You would still build up the movement pattern, the tendons etc., but you wouldn't chase fatigue. And that's the problem with the 800 and 600 m imho; few people bring enough anaerobic endurance to allow them to run them fast, so they will either end up just jogging (opposite of sprinting, metabolically speaking) or burning themselves out. I think acceleration runs and hill sprints would be the better choices for someone looking to get into sprinting short distances, that's all.

I should also mention that the pre-season I described was based on my off-season, which was typically long runs (up to 10 km at a pace of 3:45 - 4:00 min per km), tempo runs (up to 3 km at a pace of under 3:20 per kilometre), Fartlek (sprints of various lengths inserted in a longer run of up to 5 km), long intervals (e.g. 5x1000 m in 2:50-2:59 min) and hill sprints of up to 300 m. So in the pre-season, my job mostly was to get used to the projected racing speed, which is why we built up the distance per interval successively, but overall, we reduced my miles per week.
On the other hand, the off-season of sprinters was typically nothing like mine, although some of the 400 m runners would also compete in a single 3 km cross country event in November, and build up the miles for that after the end of track season in September. The others would mostly focus on starting speed (short sprints of 6-10x 60m), plyometrics and weights, and then again would build up to their racing distance. However, for them it would be "building up" their distances.

 

[maximus__]

I may be wrong, but that's not how we did it, and I think it makes sense. Maybe I can put it more clearly with a comparison: let's say your goal is to introduce heavy snatches into your program; I think we can agree you will not start with your 1 RM, but you also won't start at 40 reps per set. You would start somewhere between 5 and 10, 10 already being the upper end of the spectrum, and you would accept going lighter than you could (and not chosing 40 because it would give you a better workout and more reps). You would still build up the movement pattern, the tendons etc., but you wouldn't chase fatigue. And that's the problem with the 800 and 600 m imho; few people bring enough anaerobic endurance to allow them to run them fast, so they will either end up just jogging (opposite of sprinting, metabolically speaking) or burning themselves out. I think acceleration runs and hill sprints would be the better choices for someone looking to get into sprinting short distances, that's all.

I should also mention that the pre-season I described was based on my off-season, which was typically long runs (up to 10 km at a pace of 3:45 - 4:00 min per km), tempo runs (up to 3 km at a pace of under 3:20 per kilometre), Fartlek (sprints of various lengths inserted in a longer run of up to 5 km), long intervals (e.g. 5x1000 m in 2:50-2:59 min) and hill sprints of up to 300 m. So in the pre-season, my job mostly was to get used to the projected racing speed, which is why we built up the distance per interval successively, but overall, we reduced my miles per week.
On the other hand, the off-season of sprinters was typically nothing like mine, although some of the 400 m runners would also compete in a single 3 km cross country event in November, and build up the miles for that after the end of track season in September. The others would mostly focus on starting speed (short sprints of 6-10x 60m), plyometrics and weights, and then again would build up to their racing distance. However, for them it would be "building up" their distances.

Weightlifting and sprinting are different, but your example of a set of 10 snatches is similar. A set of 10 snatches is the equivalent of the 800s, 600s in this example. A set of 10 snatches is a huge extended effort if you are slightly competent in a proper snatch.

What I mentioned was a bare minimum progression to get someone from liking sprinting like TS (assumed minimal run volume) to be able to safely sprint a short distance like the 100m repeatedly. I assumed that this person hasn't done all the other work you mentioned with the longer runs that you had.

I know the person is either going to pace the longer intervals or gas out doing them.That's the idea. I just want them to not be able to go 100% until they build up the necessary tendon strength in a month or 3 when they are doing the 100m runs.

You could start them with shorter sprints and build up, but IMO they need to run longer intervals first to build a bit of a base. You are thinking competent well conditioned athletes who already have a base, I am trying not to break someone who wants to do some sprinting.

The guy just wants to do some sprinting to look like a sprinter. No need to make it to complicated until he is running competitive times.

 

[period]

Weightlifting and sprinting are different, but your example of a set of 10 snatches is similar. A set of 10 snatches is the equivalent of the 800s, 600s in this example. A set of 10 snatches is a huge extended effort if you are slightly competent in a proper snatch.

What I mentioned was a bare minimum progression to get someone from liking sprinting like TS (assumed minimal run volume) to be able to safely sprint a short distance like the 100m repeatedly. I assumed that this person hasn't done all the other work you mentioned with the longer runs that you had.

I know the person is either going to pace the longer intervals or gas out doing them.That's the idea. I just want them to not be able to go 100% until they build up the necessary tendon strength in a month or 3 when they are doing the 100m runs.

You could start them with shorter sprints and build up, but IMO they need to run longer intervals first to build a bit of a base. You are thinking competent well conditioned athletes who already have a base, I am trying not to break someone who wants to do some sprinting.

The guy just wants to do some sprinting to look like a sprinter. No need to make it to complicated until he is running competitive times.

Well, in terms of duration, 10 reps of snatches are still "sprinting", that's maybe 20 seconds of effort. 40 reps on the other hand are 90-120 seconds, that's 800 m. But of course, it's only an example, since 10 reps are 10 times the length of a single (but only 3.something times a triple, which is still used in weightlifting training).
We don't know much about the TS yet, since he has been noticeably absent from this thread for the last 24 hours - that's why I asked about his experience first thing. That doesn't necessarily convince me that 800 m will build up tendon strength for sprinting, that's what the running ABC is for. And I can't really think of a case where I would advise "building down" the sprinting distance. On the other hand, I admit I have never given too much thought on the training of non-competitive athletes, and am not really intending to change that any time soon, as I find it rather elementary.

 

[maximus__]

Well, in terms of duration, 10 reps of snatches are still "sprinting", that's maybe 20 seconds of effort. 40 reps on the other hand are 90-120 seconds, that's 800 m. But of course, it's only an example, since 10 reps are 10 times the length of a single (but only 3.something times a triple, which is still used in weightlifting training).
We don't know much about the TS yet, since he has been noticeably absent from this thread for the last 24 hours - that's why I asked about his experience first thing. That doesn't necessarily convince me that 800 m will build up tendon strength for sprinting, that's what the running ABC is for. And I can't really think of a case where I would advise "building down" the sprinting distance. On the other hand, I admit I have never given too much thought on the training of non-competitive athletes, and am not really intending to change that any time soon, as I find it rather elementary.

How often do you see sets of 10 in an actual weightlifting program for the Olympic lifts? No way you could do a proper set of 10 in 20 seconds. Each snatch would require a full reset of the bar. It would take you 20 secs per snatch with a proper set up after dropping from overhead. If you just mean junk reps then sure.

Think about the goal of the exercise as opposed to time. The whole idea of a snatch is to lift the most weight in the fastest way possible. The only reason it has any time under tension is because we catch it in the bottom position.

Doing the 10 is a hard effort, but you would have to drop some intensity off to get it done, same as the 800.

I think you are overthinking it, the 800m interval is going to be an actual runners warm up pace. That's intentional because this person needs to get used to running, before they start running truly fast.

Perfect world they are doing Isos, plyos lifting etc, but the man just wants to do some running on the side.

 

[period]

How often do you see sets of 10 in an actual weightlifting program for the Olympic lifts? No way you could do a proper set of 10 in 20 seconds. Each snatch would require a full reset of the bar. It would take you 20 secs per snatch with a proper set up after dropping from overhead. If you just mean junk reps then sure.

Think about the goal of the exercise as opposed to time. The whole idea of a snatch is to lift the most weight in the fastest way possible. The only reason it has any time under tension is because we catch it in the bottom position.

Doing the 10 is a hard effort, but you would have to drop some intensity off to get it done, same as the 800.

I think you are overthinking it, the 800m interval is going to be an actual runners warm up pace. That's intentional because this person needs to get used to running, before they start running truly fast.

Perfect world they are doing Isos, plyos lifting etc, but the man just wants to do some running on the side.

If you drop the bar, that's different, of course. I was talking about the 10 reps in an early learning context, warming up with the empty bar or a pair of tens, possibly hang or power snatches that you might find in a complex - or make it 8 or five, whatever. Anyway, the actual rep count doesn't matter too much, as I was using it as an example - though probably not the best one - I should try to avoid trying to make things I know quite a bit about more clear by bringing in things I don't know too much about, e.g. Olympic lifting
If you run 800 m at your warm-up pace, it's not an interval per definition; if you run it at my warm-up pace, that doesn't tell us much about how intense it is for you... And if a person needs to get used to running as a general, we are talking about a very wide field, because they might have terrible form etc. (I usually shiver when I see recreational runners jogging...), in which case the only advice I could give would be to get a coach.

I'd say if anything, we are both overthinking this. We don't know what his experience level is, so I will wait until he gets back.

 

[Adnan Adil]

First off: did you sprint competitively (= did you get coached in sprinting), or are you simply "a fan of sprinting"? I used to run track in high school, and we had a lot of professional runners in our club (international competitors who were on sponsorship programs by the police, military etc.), although we mostly had 400 m, 400 m hurdles, 800 m and 1500 m runners. So that is the experience I can draw from.

Second, I should point out that first off, most 100 m sprinters are not exactly huge, at best they are athletic. Usain Bolt weighs 94 kg at 1.95 m, Maurice Greene 80 kg at 1.76 m, Tim Montgomery 73 kg at 1.78 m, Ben Johnson 75 kg at 1.77 m, Carl Lewis 80 kg at 1.88 m (attention: this list includes at least one guy who was caught on gear). So it's typically roughly their height minus 100 cm in kg (+- 5-8). What they are is LEAN, most of them are competing at something around 6-10% body fat. Back when I was a runner (800-3000 m for me), I also used to think the sprinters were huge. But now, after spending the last 16 years in combat sports, I would say they are kinda lanky actually. Athletic, but definitely not big.

Third, according to most coaches, sprinters are born, not made. If you are naturally fast-twitch, you may become a good sprinter with appropriate training; if you're not, you will likely never be. The reason I am pointing this out is that if you are fast twitch, you will also tend to put on muscle more easily, so bear that in mind.

Fourth, sprinters in the past 3-4 decades have been weight training quite a bit. Ben Johnson allegedly had a 350 lbs bench and a 540 lbs squat, both of which are quite outstanding for someone his weight (and without a weight cut, no less!) whose sport is not lifting - not bad even for someone on gear. So what you see on TV is the product of that as well. Compare that to earlier sprinters, and you'll see the difference.
The last sprinter I am aware of who apparently didn't weight train was Allan Wells in the 80ies, he wrote a book about his training methods which I should have somewhere; and he had quite phenomenal leg developement if I may say so.

Finally, IF you want to go ahead with this "sprinting for muscle" project, I would recommend considering a few factors.
First, definitely add resistance training, preferably squats (although some sprinting coaches like the guy who trained Allyson Felix - whose name escaped me at the moment - swear by deadlifts insted) and whatever else you want to add in (lunges, Bulgarian split squats, Olympic lifts...). You may choose to do bodyweight squats instead (e.g. pistols, shrimp squats and sissy squats), but be aware those tend to produce less size growth overall, are more difficult to progress, and in my experience, you should include several variations to hit the muscles from all angles. Nordic hamstring curls aka glute ham raises and reverse hypers are also great, and I dare say mandatory if you don't deadlift. Other effective forms of resistance training for sprinting include running against resistance (prowler, sled, exergenie, resistance band...).
Second, if you're not a trained sprinter and don't care about your track sprinting times, focus on hill sprints (50-80 m) and stair sprints. Those will put more load on your legs and be ultimately safer due to the slower speed - I wish I had a dollar for every sprinter I saw tear a muscle.
Third, don't just do sprints, because neither do sprinters. Do all kinds of jumps as well (uphill or upstairs are especially brutal versions of that).
Fourth, like always when trying to get bigger, limit all the extra activity. No long runs, no long bike rides etc. Sprinters will dial in their bodyweight and body fat percentay mostly through nutrition, not through extra cardio etc.

Wow, serious experience and knowledge, man! No, I do not compete. I do not train in club even. I was the fastest guy in High school, that is all. I like sprinting- to watch and to practice. Thank you for the information! I am training with weights for very long time.

One thing I can definitely say is do some prep before you start sprinting 100%. People come back to it after years off sprinting and end up injuring achilles or hamstrings pretty fast. Start a little slower and build up to it over longer distances 800s, 600s, 400s etc before going 100% on the 200s, 100s or shorter.

Another good way to enter back into sprinting is hill sprints. Same thing is to start a bit slower and on hill that takes you 30-40 secs to run. Do repeats and walk jog back down. 5-10 repeats for now.

You will develop some lower body hypertrophy from sprinting but it will most be in the calf area unless you are severely detrained. Sprinting isn't why those athletes look the way they do, those type of athletes are drawn to the sport and perform well in it.

Yes, I am traying to go in training slow. Last Monday I have sprinted around 60 m for around six times. Today, a week later, I have tried again. After a good warm up, I have started with the warm up sprints, on the third, I gave up- the stiffness and pain in my inner thighs was too much. I just ran on a mid distance and went back home, walking again.

If everything on the internet is right, I believe for max muscle gain is best to run around twice a week for about 4 to 8 times a session and for about 10- 20 sec and around 60- 100 m. If we look at sprinters, the 100 m sprinters are most jacked, but probably it depends from many other factors. Also I wonder is their any similarity with weight training- for instance would running for too short distance give you mainly power like lifting for low reps? Is adding a little longer distance running going to give you some sarcoplasmic hypetrophy?

 

[period]

Yes, I am traying to go in training slow. Last Monday I have sprinted around 60 m for around six times. Today, a week later, I have tried again. After a good warm up, I have started with the warm up sprints, on the third, I gave up- the stiffness and pain in my inner thighs was too much. I just ran on a mid distance and went back home, walking again.

Your thighs were sore for one week after 6x60 m?! I didn't think that was possible. This is not a good sign. In any case, start slower - Maximus and me have been discussing various ways to do that.

If everything on the internet is right, I believe for max muscle gain is best to run around twice a week for about 4 to 8 times a session and for about 10- 20 sec and around 60- 100 m. If we look at sprinters, the 100 m sprinters are most jacked, but probably it depends from many other factors. Also I wonder is their any similarity with weight training- for instance would running for too short distance give you mainly power like lifting for low reps? Is adding a little longer distance running going to give you some sarcoplasmic hypetrophy?

I would say you might be confusing the factors here a bit... the selection process of sprinters usually works out that the most powerful guys stay with the 100 m (most prestigious distance), and the lighter guys who may be a tad bit slower tend to move up to 200 and 400 m, where extra bulk doesn't help you because you have to carry it for longer. They then each train in a way that allows them to maximize their performance on that distance. And that is what you see on TV.
If the sprints are even shorter, even bigger people tend to do well - football blayers, weightlifters and sometimes even powerlifters can have extremely good 30 and 40 m times, even though their time on the 100 m is rarely national level. But you don't become super big if you only run 30 m
So in the end, if you want to become big, sprinting will not be a bad addition to resistance training. But whether you sprint 2 times, 3 times or five times per week will likely make little to no difference on your size gains once you're used to it. Until you are, too much extra activity will always negativel impact size gains,; on the other hand, it will make you leaner.

 

[vision1]

Sprinting might be the best form of exercise but there are better options for muscle growth.

6 x 60m is a LOT for someone who is untrained.

What is your warmup like? What rest intervals?

I would either start with ~120m of total volume per workout or start on a hill and you can do a bit more than that.

For a track session, my warm ups are easily 20 minutes. 800m jog, static stretching certain positions, dynamic stretch, build up sprints with different forms of skips and bounding. Any less and I don't feel safe going 100%. I would personally start with shorter distances, like 10m to 30m, rest about 1 minute per 10m sprinted. You can keep rest shorter on hills.

 

[maximus__]

If you drop the bar, that's different, of course. I was talking about the 10 reps in an early learning context, warming up with the empty bar or a pair of tens, possibly hang or power snatches that you might find in a complex - or make it 8 or five, whatever. Anyway, the actual rep count doesn't matter too much, as I was using it as an example - though probably not the best one - I should try to avoid trying to make things I know quite a bit about more clear by bringing in things I don't know too much about, e.g. Olympic lifting
If you run 800 m at your warm-up pace, it's not an interval per definition; if you run it at my warm-up pace, that doesn't tell us much about how intense it is for you... And if a person needs to get used to running as a general, we are talking about a very wide field, because they might have terrible form etc. (I usually shiver when I see recreational runners jogging...), in which case the only advice I could give would be to get a coach.

I'd say if anything, we are both overthinking this. We don't know what his experience level is, so I will wait until he gets back.

You can kinda tell the experience level from the post.

That's the idea with the longer intervals. Most people haven't even run a decent 400m for years.
I want them to go slow and gradually get faster as the distance decreases. I just want the person to have done enough volume before they go throwing 100% effort into under prepared lower body muscles.

Then they go out, do the 100m repeats and it feels easy for the first few reps and can concentrate on actually sprinting.