Michael Johnson: Best Range Ever From 100M - 400M, but could he break 4:00/mile? YES!!!!!

I doubt ventolin's judno calculator is accurate in the extreme cases, but FWIW it predicts 3:57 for 43.15 and 15:00. 15:13 would be the 5000m endurance required.

PS. In swimming, 200, 400, and 800 are more like 800, mile, and 2-mile in terms of time you're active. So it's not as much of a speed/endurance divide.

One more thing, I think Curtis Beach's 100/400 combo might be worth comparing to MJ's. He has a 3:5x 1500 PR.

Sun Salute To MJ96 wrote:

We all know he was decent at the 200 and 400, but I recently came across some of his training and saw Clyde Hart had him doing once a week tempos of 3 miles in 16:30 - 17:00.

Where did you see this? I find that very difficult to believe, even for Mr. EPO himself, Michael "The other doper" Johnson.

Hardloper wrote:

One more thing, I think Curtis Beach's 100/400 combo might be worth comparing to MJ's. He has a 3:5x 1500 PR.

Beach is one of the more underrated athletes in track today imo, he just has to really establish himself in the pros

Sun Salute To MJ96 wrote:MJ 6'1" 175lbs BMI = 22.95

100M - 10.09

he destroyed a 9.86 guy on that curve in atlanta

his 100m shape that day was

~ 9.75/9.80

he couda been 1st man in history to hold all 3 sprint records simultaneously

Nick Symmonds is not 165.

Probably 150-155.

Also, BMI is not a great predictor of performance.

Johnson MIGHT be able to run ~1:14-1:15 600m but he would have been ~1:50 800m guy at best.

Talking about a mile is just silly.

Please, that 9.86 guy ran a subpar curve in a 200 he knew he was going to lose.

Johnson was no better than 9.95, on that day, and probably 10.00-10.10 on the best of the rest which is still incredible range.

Johnson just didn't have the stride length, drive, and start to really go far under 10 flat, or near 10 flat consistently. His strength was taking that 10.1 speed and holding it for 150m, and only once 185m.

no

mj split 10.12 with frankie 10.16

the curve wr was 10.18 from marsh's 19.73 & he was a 9.93 guy

King Carl never went better than 10.3 on a curve

frankie ran nowhere like a "sub-par" curve

you really haven't a clue

he was monsta in '96 & in his book he said he hit the gym like a maniac for '96 & put on 15 pounds of muscle between '95/'96 weighing ~ 210

nonsense

his stride enabled him to run 19.32

enough drive/start to whup a 9.86 guy on the curve & that guy broke the ole curve wr himself !

nonsense

how much do you take off a recorded 10.12 curve for the cenripetal/centrifugal forces compared to a straight-line 100 with no such forces ???

once you go wheat never repeat wrote:

Nick Symmonds is not 165.

Probably 150-155.

Also, BMI is not a great predictor of performance.

Johnson MIGHT be able to run ~1:14-1:15 600m but he would have been ~1:50 800m guy at best.

Talking about a mile is just silly.

IF what he said about those tempo's is true...then the guy had mid 15 or better ability for the 5k.

Normally that is probably only good for 4:25 or so for a mile, but with 43 sec speed...well he is going to get alot better faster as the distances get shorter.

once you go wheat never repeat wrote:

Nick Symmonds is not 165.

Probably 150-155.

Also, BMI is not a great predictor of performance.

Johnson MIGHT be able to run ~1:14-1:15 600m but he would have been ~1:50 800m guy at best.

Talking about a mile is just silly.

I doubt Symmonds is only 5 pounds heavier than Webb considering he's an inch taller.

You are right, BMI is not a great predictor of performance. In fact, NOTHING is a great predictor of performance save for prior performances. BMI is, however, a great predictor of not being able to perform in certain events. For instance, a BMI of 23+ indicates with an extremely high level of confidence that Nick Symmonds would not be able to win an elite level Marathon. His BMI is about 15% too high if he is in fact 5'10" 165lbs.

As for MJ being a 1:50 800m guy at best, you really think Michael Granville in HS was fitter than MJ in his prime? Get real.

Michael Granville in HS

200M 21.35 (HS Sr)

400M 46.15 (HS Jr)

800M 1:46.45 (HS Sr)

Hardloper wrote:

PS. In swimming, 200, 400, and 800 are more like 800, mile, and 2-mile in terms of time you're active. So it's not as much of a speed/endurance divide.

I'm aware of that. The 100 is like the 400 in track. Thorpe was on the WR 4 x 100 relay team that won Gold in Sydney. He also won Gold in 100M freestyle individual at the '02 Commonwealth Games, '02 Pan Pacific, took bronze in that event at '03 World Champs, as well '04 Athens Olympics.

Agreed. And I would seriously doubt that he ever ran 16:30 for 3 miles. Quite frankly, I would doubt that he ever ran 3 miles ever in his training. That would have been contrary to his racing goals.

once you go wheat never repeat wrote:

Nick Symmonds is not 165.

Probably 150-155.

Also, BMI is not a great predictor of performance.

Johnson MIGHT be able to run ~1:14-1:15 600m but he would have been ~1:50 800m guy at best.

Talking about a mile is just silly.

A: He wasn't running 3 mile tempos in 16:30.

B: Saying Johnson could run a 4:00 mile is like saying a 4:00 miler could break 21 in the 200. It's not happening.

+1, except that it's probably more like 20.25

Faster than 21 anyway

I looked at those old threads the guy upthread linked, and I have to ask who this ventolin^3 poster is, and who the sprintgeezer poster is. They both rub me the wrong way but I'm with sprintgeezer on this one. I find sprintgeezer way too macho for my liking, but his machismo beats ventolin^3's ignorance any day.

Is this what normally happens on this board, the same issues are re-hashed after several years' hiatus?

OK, admittedly I made up the part about him running 3 mile tempos in 16:30, but I did it on accident.

I saw this link

http://www.edb.utexas.edu/ssn/CCA%20PDF/Run-200-400%20Sprint.PDF

It was talking about Michael Johnson, and then goes on to detail the training of an athlete referenced as "MJ". Reading it late at night, I apparently missed the fact this guy was running his college 200s about a second and a half (or more) slower than Michael Johnson. I skimmed through it and saw the part about 4 mile tempos at 5:45/mi and 3 milers at 5:30/mi.

My bad. I'm clearly a "ruhtard".

That being said, if this is a real person being referenced in the paper, and not just a theoretical person and training plan, I'd be interested to know who it refers to.

Here are very general sample workouts of what Clyde Hart says is "Endurance Running", but nothing about what the real MJ ever ran if he did any of those 6 x 800M efforts.

Examples of Endurance Running

a) 15 minutes at steady‑state speed

b) 30 minutes of fartlek running

c) 6 x 800 meters on cross country course with 3 minutes recovery time

Also...I didn't make up anything about Ian Thorpe.

I could see MJ possibly breaking 4 for the 1500, but not the mile

he had the a very good range simply due to EPO .

his speed endurance would never of been the same without it

,never would of ran that time in 200m especially .

might got down to mid 43 in 400m with roids but never the consistantcy or unbeaten run without forementioned PED

one of the dirtiest .

aduck2022 wrote:

he had the a very good range simply due to EPO .

his speed endurance would never of been the same without it

,never would of ran that time in 200m especially .

might got down to mid 43 in 400m with roids but never the consistantcy or unbeaten run without forementioned PED

one of the dirtiest .

I can't say I totally disagree with you. Considering this, especially, it makes it more realistic that he could break 4:00 in the mile, or at the least 4:00 in the 1500.