On 400-metre tracks, runners often run in the second lane, especially when doing one-mile repeats. Their thinking, of course, is that four tours of the track in lane one will add up to only 1600 metres, about nine meters short of a mile, while four trips in lane two will measure almost precisely a mile.

However, as we pointed out recently, this strategy usually ends up creating extra-long 'miles'. We noted that the distance around the track in lane two, assuming a lane width of 1.25 metres (a common value), is actually 407.9 metres. Of course, four trips in lane two would add up to 1631.6 metres, about 22 metres longer than a mile, which means that runners who complete their 'mile' repeats in lane two in a specified time are usually running too fast (they're covering about 1631 metres in the goal time allotted for 1609 metres).

What's wrong with running too fast? Isn't higher intensity the key to greater fitness, as we always preach? Well yes, but it's higher, well-controlled intensity that does the trick, not out-of-control speed demonism. One of the reasons for running at a goal speed is to develop great economy at that speed, so that you can run at a lower percentage of your VO2max at the hoped-for velocity; training at dissimilar paces won't develop that essential economy.

Another reason to train at a well-defined pace is to develop a feel for that velocity, so that you can settle unfailingly into that tempo from close to the outset of an important race, thus avoiding the twin pitfalls of either starting the competition too fast or too slow. It's important to note, too, that if you are carrying out intervals specifically to raise your VO2max, sometimes running at faster than VO2max pace will produce smaller gains in max aerobic capacity, compared with running at or slightly below this key speed. The bottom line is that higher speeds in workouts are not necessarily better speeds.

Getting back to the problem of measuring distances around a 400-metre track in various lanes, note that the actual distance around one loop depends on lane width. If lane one is more narrow than the frequently encountered 1.25 metres, then a journey around the track in lane two would actually be shorter than 407.9 metres; if it's more expansive, the 'quarter-mile' rep would be longer than 407.9. Unfortunately, track lane-widths vary all over the place.

However, there is a very easy way to calculate distances around the track in any lane, as long as one measures the widths of the lanes.

The formula is simply L' = L + (2 x pi x W), where: L = distance around the track in lane one (in metres); L' = the distance around the track in a higher lane (in meters); W = the net width of all lower lanes (in meters); pi = approximately 3.14159
For example, if you're going to be running on the track, and you want to max out the distance covered per track circuit and have thus decided to run in lane eight, W would simply be seven times the width of a single lane (using the common lane distance of 1.25 metres, W would be 8.75 metres). Using this equation, the distance around the track in lane eight would be 400 + (2 x 3.14159 x 8.75) = 455 metres. Completing four laps in lane eight would amount to 1820 metres, or 1.13 miles.

To put it another way, each increase in lane adds an additional distance d given by d = 2 x pi x w, where w = the single lane width. When w = 1.25 m, the common width, each increase in lane adds 7.854 metres to the length of a trip around the track.

The formula works for circular tracks, oblong tracks (two straights, two curves), or rounded rectangular tracks (4 straights, 4 curves) as long as curved parts are circular. Work it out!