I am in my first year of running and would like to know where my efforts should be focused. My PRs are as follows:
400m: 57.2 relay split
800m: 2:09 relay split
1600m: 4:53
I think I am more of a speed guy but is that true?
I am in my first year of running and would like to know where my efforts should be focused. My PRs are as follows:
400m: 57.2 relay split
800m: 2:09 relay split
1600m: 4:53
I think I am more of a speed guy but is that true?
Theater?
Academics hopefully?
I would say those are all roughly comparable (the 1600 perhaps a little worse than the other two) and are decent times assuming you're a high school frosh.
WhatshouldIrun wrote:
I am in my first year of running and would like to know where my efforts should be focused. My PRs are as follows:
400m: 57.2 relay split
800m: 2:09 relay split
1600m: 4:53
I think I am more of a speed guy but is that true?
Try to run a 3200m at some point. From your times from 400-1600 it would seem like you should focus on the 800 and 1600 with the 400 as a secondary event. In order to get really competitive in the 400 you would have to improve your speed A LOT and you might not be able to do so. In the 800 and 1600- as a first year runner you have tons of room for improvement as you build your endurance so longer distances will probably be stronger events in the future. Try the 3200m or a 5k just to see how you do- maybe try a 200m race also at some point to see how much speed you have just to make sure that the 400 isn't an event to focus on.
Running across America has become a speed event. Good luck.
How old are you?
You are NOT a speed guy.
You are just untrained.
To pull numbers from my @#$$, at best, you might run 52 for 400 as a senior.
A 52 is not likely but applying the same odds to the 1600, you would run 4:13.
UYG(T&(^GUYasdg2 wrote:
You are NOT a speed guy.
You are just untrained.
To pull numbers from my @#$$, at best, you might run 52 for 400 as a senior.
A 52 is not likely but applying the same odds to the 1600, you would run 4:13.
So he can improve by 5 seconds in the 400 but 40 seconds in the 1600?
Yes, he has been running for less than a year. You rapidly improve in the shorter distances and it takes longer in the longer distances. If he had any actual speed, it would already be showing in the 400.
I coached a kid last year who ran 60 sec for the 400 with only spring football training. This year, as a freshman, he ran both indoor and outdoor after the football season and he ran 53.3.
What is the threshold that separates a "hobbyjogger" from a "sub-elite" runner?
BREAKING: Leonard Korir not going to Paris! 11 Universality athletes get in ahead of him!
Do "running influencers" harm the competitive nature of the sport?
Caitlin Clark thinks she can beat Eagles draft pick Cooper Dejean in 1 on 1