Hardloper wrote:
Mike Rozzi wrote:
Why are you calling him Mo?
He has made it clear his name is Mohamed.
Racist.
Well his name is NOW Mohamed, but it was still "Mo" who ran all those 5Ks!
No Islamophobia please!
Hardloper wrote:
Mike Rozzi wrote:
Why are you calling him Mo?
He has made it clear his name is Mohamed.
Racist.
Well his name is NOW Mohamed, but it was still "Mo" who ran all those 5Ks!
No Islamophobia please!
This should work both ways. There should be the flip side: Mo tries to do a normal person's job.
MurderDub wrote:
RejectRunner wrote:
Mo is running 61 second 400m at his 5k pace. That guy basically ran a 60 second 400. Your perception of "healthy male" is skewed bro.
I think I had a couple more qualifiers than just "healthy male" in there. A healthy young male inclined toward running...
I was a severely mediocre high school track athlete. My 400 was 51-52 seconds and my 800 was 2:03. I knew many people on the team and not on it who were faster than me and who were fitter as well.
I hate to break it to you, but if you could run 51-52 seconds for a 400 without serious training then you are very talented. I've run 20,000 miles and run 4:22 for a mile but can't run faster than 58 sec for a 400m. I've only had two teammates who could run 52-53 sec for a 400m, and they both ran 1:54 in the 800m in high school.
GetItDone wrote:
MurderDub wrote:
I think I had a couple more qualifiers than just "healthy male" in there. A healthy young male inclined toward running...
I was a severely mediocre high school track athlete. My 400 was 51-52 seconds and my 800 was 2:03. I knew many people on the team and not on it who were faster than me and who were fitter as well.
I hate to break it to you, but if you could run 51-52 seconds for a 400 without serious training then you are very talented. I've run 20,000 miles and run 4:22 for a mile but can't run faster than 58 sec for a 400m. I've only had two teammates who could run 52-53 sec for a 400m, and they both ran 1:54 in the 800m in high school.
Like I said, too late now. I'm 36. I don't even remember winning a single race in high school. That's what you get with those times in big city SoCal. We had a team full of D-1 runners, so... I went to conference finals in the 800 and ran mid-pack a couple times. I do wish, in retrospect, that I had run in college so I would know what my true potential was.
So, there you go, kids: Don't do drugs, stay in school and don't give up on track just b/c you never finish first.
how long could Jamin hold this pace?
the longer he can the more excited I get
ukathleticscoach wrote:
It's even worse for those of us who have trained hard and would still struggle to run more than a couple of laps at this pace.
Yeah. I almost cried when the 'fun' runner ran that 60 second 400. Sheesh, all the work and miles I put in and at my peak I could run 17:54 5K, 2:54 marathon but best I did in that time frame was 67.1 for the 400 and 2:29 800. I couldn't even match the 'fun' runner much less Mo.
so you are saying that 51s 400 you couldn't even make your own team...but 2:03 made it to conference finals? Either that conference is skewed way sprinter or you are misremembering.
those two performances are markedly disparate. 51s is worth ~1:55, 2:03 is worth ~56.
For reference i was a 51s open, 50 flat relay/1:53 relay 1:54 open/4:17 guy. don't believe your memory....
beta wrote:
so you are saying that 51s 400 you couldn't even make your own team...but 2:03 made it to conference finals? Either that conference is skewed way sprinter or you are misremembering.
those two performances are markedly disparate. 51s is worth ~1:55, 2:03 is worth ~56.
For reference i was a 51s open, 50 flat relay/1:53 relay 1:54 open/4:17 guy. don't believe your memory....
yea give me a break. 51 is usually what most 4 x 4 teams are working with. sure its not out of this world fast, but i ran 157 800 in HS and i never got down to 51 in a 400, not even close.
MurderDub wrote:
pyuke wrote:
"51-52 seconds"???
I hope you didn't show up for classes the next day after stinking up the place with that slow azz time. A time so bad you can't even remember the seconds, much less the decimal.
Didn't make varsity in the 4 with that time. Had to run the 8 instead. I was mediocre at 8 and didn't even think about running in college. I am old and slow now so it doesn't matter about moi but I am surprised that 60 is considered quick. Then again, I gas out quickly; you guys could run me down after the 800 meter mark with little effort.
Lol 51 seconds for a 400 is a pleb time, get out of here your to slow for this message board, my grandmother ran faster than that for fun last weekend lol #SlowAss
darunningguyguy wrote:
Lol 51 seconds for a 400 is a pleb time, get out of here your to slow for this message board, my grandmother ran faster than that for fun last weekend lol #SlowAss
Maybe so, but I'd bet he knows the difference between "your" and "you're."
but there's this.... wrote:
darunningguyguy wrote:
Lol 51 seconds for a 400 is a pleb time, get out of here your to slow for this message board, my grandmother ran faster than that for fun last weekend lol #SlowAss
Maybe so, but I'd bet he knows the difference between "your" and "you're."
Probably "to" and "too" as well.
RejectRunner wrote:
Mo is running 61 second 400m at his 5k pace. That guy basically ran a 60 second 400. Your perception of "healthy male" is skewed bro.
Mo did not run 12:42. Yes there is a big difference between 61.0 and 61.9.
What the guy did, apparently, was maintain 23kph for 60 seconds, which is 387m, but possibly more because he may have gone over 23 part of the way, but it doesn't mean anything because he was on a treadmill.
Hayduke wrote:
beta wrote:
so you are saying that 51s 400 you couldn't even make your own team...but 2:03 made it to conference finals? Either that conference is skewed way sprinter or you are misremembering.
those two performances are markedly disparate. 51s is worth ~1:55, 2:03 is worth ~56.
For reference i was a 51s open, 50 flat relay/1:53 relay 1:54 open/4:17 guy. don't believe your memory....
yea give me a break. 51 is usually what most 4 x 4 teams are working with. sure its not out of this world fast, but i ran 157 800 in HS and i never got down to 51 in a 400, not even close.
Has it occurred to y'all that you're endurance-based runners, not 400 runners who got shoved into the 800, a race you never wanted to run? A 52 only translates to a 1:50-mid-something if you have the stamina to make that happen. I ran about 20-25 miles a week if memory serves and definitely never got under 2-flat. Our fastest 800 runner had a good deal less foot speed than I did, but was just stornger. I'm from a family of sprinters, not 800 runners.
I'm sure if I ran in college and put the miles in, I would've run faster in the 8.
beta wrote:
so you are saying that 51s 400 you couldn't even make your own team...but 2:03 made it to conference finals? Either that conference is skewed way sprinter or you are misremembering.
those two performances are markedly disparate. 51s is worth ~1:55, 2:03 is worth ~56.
For reference i was a 51s open, 50 flat relay/1:53 relay 1:54 open/4:17 guy. don't believe your memory....
I was the 400 alternate. I had the impression that the 8 was where the coaches threw the runners who were between the sprints and distance. We didn't have a coach, but instead were just shuttled between distance and 400 drills. Both the sprint coach and distance coach largely ignored us.