JEREMY WARINER - 200, 400, 800

he is the best at the 400. there is no reason for him to run the 800. spreading himself over 3 different races would be disaster. sometimes even spreading yourself over 2 races can be detrimental ala mo greene and mj in the 2000 trials both getting injured in the 200.

MJ was a doper and nobody will break any of his records in the 4 and 2. Wariner would be awesome at 8 tho, probably a better chance to get record in 8 than 4. Under 43? have u been smoking crack, johnson even tho on drugs was not able to drop that much time off of his best. Plus MJ ran sub 44 easily it looked, wariner struggles to do that in relay splits

Doping?? Proof??? Talk is cheap!!!!!

always up for a run wrote:

so what is the general consensus on Jeremy Wariner? Even if you don't like him, he is aMAzing.44.12 so early in the season is truly astonishing. I don't think he can break the 200m record, not any time soon anyway (it did take Johnson a while to break it himself) but i definitely think he could lower the 400m record to below 43, especially since the current record is 43.18. I, like many others i know, would LOVE to see him run an 800, even if its just for kicks. i think he'd run at LEAST 1.46, if not 1.45 or even 1.44, though that would be truly amazing. i think if he trained for the 800 as well, it'd take away from his 400, which is why he probably doesnt want to do it. but alberto juantorena was awesome...

Thoughts?

If Wariner could only muster a 1:46, what would be the point? You want him to move from an event that he is the best in the world at to an event that he would be lucky to run Europe "B" races in? All this Wariner 800 talk is annoying, and stupid. On second thought, so are you.

If Wariner could only muster a 1:46, what would be the point? You want him to move from an event that he is the best in the world at to an event that he would be lucky to run Europe "B" races in? All this Wariner 800 talk is annoying, and stupid. On second thought, so are you.[/quote]

NOT A BAD IDEA FOR AN OLYMPIC DOUBLE, WHEN YOU CONSIDER THAT AT THE OLYPMPICS THEY WILL NOT ALLOW THE EPO FRAUDS TO RUN SO HE COULD WIN GOLD IN 1:44 OR SO..........BUT YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THE EUROPEAN CIRCUIT, THEY DON'T WANT TO CATCH THE DRUGGIES AS THEY WANT B.S. TIMES FOR THE FANS.....WARINER IS CLEAN AND COULD DO DAMAGE AGAINST A CLEAN 800 FIELD.

YOU must be on crack. where's your proof?

i didn't say he should switch you dickhead. i said just give one 800 against a strong field perhaps to test his capabilities. like webb did with the 10k (except that he's supposedly thinking of moving). get your facts right, idiot.

Clearly he has no need to move up, but that doesn't change the fact that he could do it if he wanted to. With a few years of training he would be unbeatable at 800m. Yes, he could go under 1:40.

always up for a run wrote:

i didn't say he should switch you dickhead. i said just give one 800 against a strong field perhaps to test his capabilities. like webb did with the 10k (except that he's supposedly thinking of moving). get your facts right, idiot.

Webb is a better 10K runner than Wariner would be at 800. Come to think of it, Webb is better at 800 than Wariner could ever be.

Wariner has nothing to gain from running the 800. He has even said in interviews that he's not going to do it and wouldn't be very good at it.

A lot of people think that because he can bust a 44 with apparent ease, that he could just slow down a few seconds and run back to back 50s. It just doesn't work that way.

That's a ridiculous statement. The 800 is NOT a distance race! Webb is a distance runner. Webb could run a good 800, but if the two men raced at that distance tomorrow, Wariner would smoke him.

We have a great deal of clueless posters on this thread. If Wariner ran a 800m tomorrow against Webb Webb would win easily. I would think that Wariner would be good for 1:49 at best.

LOL i know right? right?

marijuologist wrote:

Clearly he has no need to move up, but that doesn't change the fact that he could do it if he wanted to. With a few years of training he would be unbeatable at 800m. Yes, he could go under 1:40.

Only 3 men have ever come within 2 seconds of 1:40, and the first one did it in 1981. Wariner is a great 400m runner, but 1:40 is very, very fast.

Take another guy who should have run very fast when he moved up - Wilson Kipketer. 1:41.11 didn't get him much under four minutes for the mile. Sure, he didn't run a good one when he had that kind of fitness, but even as a young guy he didn't show much promise when he tried running twice as far as his primary race distance.

ridiculous wrote:

That's a ridiculous statement. The 800 is NOT a distance race! Webb is a distance runner. Webb could run a good 800, but if the two men raced at that distance tomorrow, Wariner would smoke him.

You're wrong.

I can't believe anyone could think Wariner would beat Webb at 800. It's absurd. Webb can run 1:46/45, Wariner I'd say could run 1:49/50 at best.

doper wrote:

Plus MJ ran sub 44 easily it looked, wariner struggles to do that in relay splits

"easily"? I doubt mj thought it was easy...

He made it look easy,sorry. You cant deny that MJ ran 44 lows easy, he was always able to recover and give interviews right after preliminary rounds.

About webb and wariner, to be honest if they both started training right now for a month for the 8 i think webb would indeed win, as of if they raced tomor, i think wariner is in better speed shape than webb and would end up outkicking him.

"That's a ridiculous statement. The 800 is NOT a distance race! Webb is a distance runner. Webb could run a good 800, but if the two men raced at that distance tomorrow, Wariner would smoke him."

They said the same about Juantorena...before he won gold in the 400 AND 800

Wariner, at best, could dip a shape under 1:50 in my opinion. Webb could probably run 1:48 right now. It wouldn't be much of a race. Webb would bring it through in 53 or so and Wariner would look comfy, then at 600 or so Wariner would start to feel it and drop off the pace.