• for realsies
      • Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/30/2016 5:53PM
      • for realsies
      • Rowbury
        Dibaba
        Kipyegon
        ????

        Budd, Obiri don't have the sub 2
    • Quantum theory
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/30/2016 7:41PM - in reply to for realsies
      • Quantum theory
      • Sifan Hassan, maryam Yussuf Jamal.
        Btw, where is Maryam Jamal? I have seen her compete since last year.
    • Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/30/2016 8:08PM - in reply to for realsies
      • Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?

        Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.

        Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.

        Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.

        Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).

        1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
    • Devil Dog
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/30/2016 8:19PM - in reply to RachelRnr
      • Devil Dog
      • RachelRnr wrote:
        Ummm, ever heard of Jordan Hasay?
        Ummm, Jordan Hasay hasn't broken ANY of those times.
    • Mrr82
      registered
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 12:01AM - in reply to Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • Mrr82
        registered
      • Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?

        Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.

        Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.

        Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.

        Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).

        1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
        You think 15 is in a completely different league than 4? Not really....at all. Sub 4 is more impressive than sub 15.
    • 420 ... Mile?
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 5:39AM - in reply to Mrr82
      • 420 ... Mile?
      • Mrr82 wrote:
        Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?

        Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.

        Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.

        Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.

        Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).

        1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
        You think 15 is in a completely different league than 4? Not really....at all. Sub 4 is more impressive than sub 15.
        Yea, by a long shot. In order - 1500, 3000, 800, 5000
    • 420 ... Mile?
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 5:40AM - in reply to 420 ... Mile?
      • 420 ... Mile?
      • 420 ... Mile? wrote:
        Mrr82 wrote:
        Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?

        Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.

        Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.

        Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.

        Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).

        1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
        You think 15 is in a completely different league than 4? Not really....at all. Sub 4 is more impressive than sub 15.
        Yea, by a long shot. In order - 1500, 3000, 800, 5000
        Whoops, switch 800 and 5000
    • Fatty R. Belt Buckle
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 6:51AM - in reply to Devil Dog
      • Fatty R. Belt Buckle
      • Devil Dog wrote:
        RachelRnr wrote:
        Ummm, ever heard of Jordan Hasay?
        Ummm, Jordan Hasay hasn't broken ANY of those times.
        The Poster was thinking for the 600, the 1000, the 2200 and the 2-mile.
    • Battle of Long Island
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 6:56AM - in reply to Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • Battle of Long Island
      • Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        Would Huddle? Her 1500 is 4:08.

        Infeld? She was a 1500 runner for a good while, but it seems more likely that she will break 15 than 4.
    • Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 8:39AM - in reply to Battle of Long Island
      • Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • Well she has 8:42 in the 3k acording to IAAF.

        If she is able to run closer to 8:30 it's certainly possible to run sub 4.

        The thing about sub 4 is that generally in the women class 1500m tend to be very tactically oriented, so you can't really expect to reach 1000m in 2:44+ and still be able to close in 1:15 that last 500m. (unless you're worth 3:54 or so).

        The burden of leading in the 5000m isn't so high (despite the longer distance) because eventually everyone will stick to their capable pace. Also more groups tend to form during the race.

        There are more sub 15 times (like 750) than sub 4 (counted 290), so maybe sub 15 isn't really that much more impressive than sub 4 for a WOMAN.

        Still I think that many of those 5000m times didn't bother too much with 1500m racing.

        Personally I would rather have sub 15 in the 5000m.
    • RachelRnr
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 8:46AM - in reply to Devil Dog
      • RachelRnr
      • Devil Dog wrote:
        RachelRnr wrote:
        Ummm, ever heard of Jordan Hasay?
        Ummm, Jordan Hasay hasn't broken ANY of those times.
        Yet. Yet.
    • notrump
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 12:38PM - in reply to Arbitrary nice round numbers
      • notrump
      • Sub 4 is harder than sub 2? Yes, but doing both is rare in the US. Only 5 have done it (and not Jenny Simpson). Very few 800 meter runners can extend to 1500, while Sub 4 1500 meter runners are normally close to 2. In fact, all of the US women who have both are primarily 1500 meter runners.
        Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I just don't understand why you got to be so picky about those numbers to begin with. Are you assuming that those times are equivalent?

        Don't get me wrong it's an interesting question nonetheless.

        Being that 8:30 and 15 are in a complete different league from 2 and 4 (2 being the weakest), I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their training.

        The sub 2 would also be achievable but most likely would require a few tries beforehand, since it's a hard pace if your body isn't used to it.

        Still a sub 4 is normally harder than a sub 2, especially at high school level.

        Also that russian Galkina is roaming around those times (2:00, 4:01, 8:42) except at the 5000m (14:33) but really I doubt that those times reflect her real ability (8:58 steeplechase).

        1:58, 3:56 and 8:25 sound more realistic to me.
    • topsider
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 2:36PM - in reply to Battle of Long Island
      • topsider
      • Battle of Long Island wrote:
        Arbitrary nice round numbers wrote:
        I can assure you that pretty much all of the gals running sub 8:30 and 15 (Ayana, Defar and company) would absolutely crush 4 minute in the 1500m without changing a thing in their train

        Would Huddle? Her 1500 is 4:08.

        Infeld? She was a 1500 runner for a good while, but it seems more likely that she will break 15 than 4.
        It is impressive range. Besides Slaney and Jenny, Regina was closest with 8:39.

        I think Jenny will go sub-2 at some point.

        Molly will never get close to sub-4 or sub-2.

        Among current runners, I think the one with possibly the best chance (besides Jenney) is Houlihan (2:01, 4:03, 15:06). Alexa has not demonstrated to this point that she has the stamina for sub-15. And who knows if Cain will ever run as fast as she did at age 18.
    • Zlatan
      registered
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 7/31/2016 3:15PM - in reply to for realsies
      • Zlatan
        registered
      • Sonia O'Sullivan ran 2 flat in her one and only serious 800m race. I'm sure she could have been sub 2

        3:58
        8:21
        14:41
    • said88
      registered
      • RE: Women who have broken 2, 4, 8:30, and 15 8/3/2016 4:48PM - in reply to Eevee
      • said88
        registered
      • Eevee wrote:
        Mary Decker oh so close with 1:56, 3:57, 8:25, 15:06
        But Maricica Puica was much closer:
        1:57.8, 3:57.22, 8:27.83 and 15:06.04 compared to Decker's 15:06.53...